NEESR-GC: Seismic Risk Management for Port Systems Glenn J. Rix Georgia Institute of Technology

NEESR-GC: Seismic Risk Management for Port Systems

Glenn J. RixGeorgia Institute of Technology

400

500

600

700

800

900

1990 2003

$ B

illio

n

U.S. Waterborne Trade

Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics (2004)

IntroductionSystems ViewExperimental SimulationNumerical SimulationPort OperationsEOTEABImpacts

U.S. Waterborne Trade

28.4

40.9

26.4

4.3

21.8

77.5

0.4 0.3

0

20

40

60

80

100

Land Water Air Other

Per

cent

ValueWeight



Seattle (4%)

Oakland (5%)

Los Angeles (20%)

Long Beach (16%)

Houston (5%)

Top 10 U.S. Container Ports

Tacoma (4%)

Savannah (5%)

Charleston (6%)

Norfolk (5%)

New York (13%)



Seattle

Oakland

Los Angeles

Long Beach

Houston

Seismic Hazard

Tacoma

Savannah

Charleston

Norfolk

New York


Current Practice “Minimal damage” and “no downtime” for

ground motions with 50% probability of exceedance in 50 years

“Repairable/controllable damage” and “acceptable downtime” for ground motions with 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years

Vaguely defined performance requirements Focus is on individual components No direct consideration of business

interruption losses Based on arbitrary ground motion probabilities,

not loss probabilities


Vision

The performance of the port system rather than its individual components should be the basis of choosing among seismic risk mitigation options. Because of the complexity of the port system, this approach requires civil engineering, logistics, risk analysis, and behavioral decision disciplines to implement.


University of Washington

Project Team

Decision Research, Inc.

University of California - Davis

Seismic Systems &Engineering Consultants, Inc

University of SouthernCalifornia

Universityof Illinois

Universityof Texas

Georgia Tech

DrexelUniversity

MIT

Civil Engineering

Logistics

Risk and Decision Analysis


Project Team Geotechnical

– Ross Boulanger

– Patricia Gallagher

– Ellen Rathje

– Glenn Rix

– Andrew Whittle Structural

– Reggie DesRoches

– Jim LaFave

– Dawn Lehman

– Roberto Leon

– Charles Roeder

Soil-Structure Interaction– Dominic Assimaki

– Eduardo Kausel Logistics

– Alan Erera Risk and Decision

Analysis– Ann Bostrom

– Robin Gregory

– Craig Taylor

– Stu Werner Project Coordinator

– Tanya Blackwell


Project Team Geotechnical

– Ross Boulanger

– Patricia Gallagher

– Ellen Rathje

– Glenn Rix

– Andrew Whittle Structural

– Reggie DesRoches

– Jim LaFave

– Dawn Lehman

– Roberto Leon

– Charles Roeder

Soil-Structure Interaction– Dominic Assimaki

– Eduardo Kausel Logistics

– Alan Erera Risk and Decision

Analysis– Ann Bostrom

– Robin Gregory

– Craig Taylor

– Stu Werner Project Coordinator

– Tanya Blackwell


Port SystemIntroductionSystems ViewExperimental SimulationNumerical SimulationPort OperationsEOTEABImpacts

Port Stakeholders

Port owners and managers Terminal operators Ocean carriers Intermodal transportation providers Supply chain dependents Employee unions Finance and insurance providers Government agencies Public


Multiple Decision Perspectives

Source: Linstone (1984)


Risk Management Framework Define the decision problem and gather

information on the port system Elicit stakeholder objectives and define

alternatives Evaluate the component and systems-

level performance of each alternative Present the results in a manner to

enhance stakeholder comprehension, clarify underlying choices, and address tradeoffs

Iterate


Experimental Simulations

Liquefaction

Soil-structureinteraction

Crane response


Soil Improvement Methods Prefabricated

vertical drains– Low cost means to

suppress or dissipate excess pore pressure

Colloidal silica grouting– Environmentally

benign material with low initial viscosity, controllable gel time, and long-term mechanical stability


Soil Improvement Methods Less disruptive than other soil improvement

methods; well suited to developed sites Able to treat areas inaccessible via

conventional techniques Opportunity to investigate drainage and

stiffening as compared with densification as mechanisms to mitigate liquefaction

Evaluated via a full-scale field test at the Port of Seattle using NEES@UTexas and centrifuge tests at NEES@UCDavis


Pile-Deck ConnectionsIntroductionSystems ViewExperimental SimulationNumerical SimulationPort OperationsEOTEABImpacts

Pile Configurations

Steel batter piles - greater ductility and repairability

Vertical pre-cast concrete piles with unbonded dowels - greater ductility

Pre-cast deck construction - efficient construction and repair

Evaluated via full-scale tests at NEES@UIUC


Container CranesIntroductionSystems ViewExperimental SimulationNumerical SimulationPort OperationsEOTEABImpacts

Container Cranes

Ductile moment connections and bracing systems

Technologies to accommodate large ground displacements due to liquefaction

Isolation systems Tie down systems Evaluated via large-scale tests at

NEES@Buffalo


Numerical Simulation Compute the response of geotechnical,

structural, and soil-structure systems for existing and remediated/retrofitted conditions as a standalone tool and integrated with experimental simulations– Soil-foundation-structure interface nonlinearities– Large, liquefaction-induced ground displacements– Scattering and diffraction in heterogeneous media– Diffraction in 2D and 3D topographic configurations– Coupled longitudinal, transverse, and torsional

responses


Numerical Simulation

Simplified analyses– p-y curves for piles derived via pushover

(i.e., static) analyses

Simplified dynamic analyses– Equivalent stiffness of embedded pile

derived via cyclic loading simulations applied at the pile-deck connection

Dynamic analyses– Finite element modeling of soil-structure

systemSource: PIANC (2001)


Numerical Simulation Simplified analyses

– p-y curves for piles derived via pushover (i.e., static) analyses

Simplified dynamic analyses– Equivalent stiffness of embedded pile derived via

cyclic loading simulations applied at the pile-deck connection

Dynamic analyses via macroelements– Macroelements developed via numerical simulations

and validated via experimental simulations

Dynamic analyses– Finite element modeling of soil-structure system


Port Operations

Develop models to estimate system performance (e.g., container throughput) given the state of operational components– Rapid evaluation– Integration within the risk management

framework

Why not just simulate?– Requires enumerating a large number of

possible component damage states and simulating system performance for each


Port Operations Develop real-time operational decision support

tools to improve port system performance given restricted operational resources– Existing operational models are not equipped to:

• Handle dynamic and stochastic information

• Integrate decisions for multiple port components

• Solve large-scale problems faced by modern ports

– Real-time systems optimization has the potential to dramatically improve decisions made in response to natural hazards as well as terrorist incidents


K-12 Hosting a teacher from

Westlake High School via the Georgia Intern-Fellowships for Teachers (GIFT) Program and an RET supplement

Hosting 6 Westlake students for summer research (sponsored by the Siemens Foundation)

Develop term projects using NEES tele-presence capabilities


HBCU-REU Program Target students at

Historically Black Colleges and Universities

Participate in NEES research and enrichment activities


Minority Postdoctoral Fellowships

Increase under-represented groups in academia

Research experience Faculty mentoring Student advising Leverage the AGEP program

Dr. Mark LewisDr. Sam Graham


Industrial Fellowship Program 1-2 week in-

residence experience at a partner institution

Knowledge exchange

Facilitate technology transfer


Executive Advisory Board

Tom Armstrong, Georgia Ports Authority

Susumu Iai, Kyoto University Michael Jordan, Liftech Consultants,

Inc. Tom LaBasco, Port of Oakland Dick Wittkop, Moffat and Nichol Port of Seattle representative


Impacts Innovative soil remediation techniques

well suited for port facilities Improved pile configurations and pile-

deck connections that are more ductile and repair-friendly

Improved crane design and retrofit techniques to reduce damage from large ground deformations

Numerical simulation using macroelements to fill the gap between simple and complex analysis methods


Impacts Logistics models to link the condition of

port facilities with system performance Real-time decision support to optimize

port operations following a disruptive event

Formal research on stakeholder participation and behavioral decision making to integrate value-focused decision research with research on perception and understanding of seismic risks


Impacts

A seismic risk management framework that uses the performance of the port system rather than its individual components as the basis for choosing among risk mitigation options

An EOT program that addresses the lack of under-represented groups in the STEM areas with K-12 through postdoctoral programs


Acknowledgements National Science Foundation

(Award No. CMS-0530478) NEESinc and NEESit Siemens Foundation Port of Seattle Georgia Ports Authority U.S. Naval Facilities Engineering Command NILEX Corporation Coasts, Oceans, Ports, and Rivers Institute of

ASCE U.S. Government Accountability Office

Vision

This project integrates civil engineering, logistics, risk analysis, and behavioral decision disciplines to develop a seismic risk mitigation framework that uses the performance of the port system rather than its individual components as the basis of choosing among risk mitigation options.

Soil Improvement MethodsPrefabricated vertical drains and colloidal silica

grouting: Less disruptive Able to treat areas inaccessible via

conventional techniques Opportunity to investigate drainage and

stiffening vis-à-vis densification as mechanisms to mitigate liquefaction

Evaluated via a full-scale field test at the Port of Seattle using NEES@UTexas and centrifuge tests at NEES@UCDavis

Payload Projects

Researchers with external funding Researchers without funding (e.g.,

prediction “competitions”) EAB and stakeholder-funded projects Industry-funded projects (e.g., other soil

improvement techniques)


Simplified Analyses

Simplified Dynamic Analyses

Dynamic Analyses

Earth retaining structures

Empirical and pseudo-static methods

Newmark methods and charts based on parametric studies

FEM/FDM

Linear, equivalent linear, or non-linear analyses

2D/3DPile-Supported Wharves

Response spectrum method

Pushover analysis and response spectrum methods

Cranes

Source: PIANC (2001)


Simplified Analyses

Simplified Dynamic Analyses

Dynamic Analyses via

Macroelements

Dynamic Analyses

Earth retaining structures

Empirical and pseudo-static methods

Newmark methods and charts based on parametric studies

Macroelements are derived by integrating material behavior of a locally affected volume and concentrating the global stress-strain response at the soil-structure interface

FEM/FDM

Linear, equivalent linear, or non-linear analyses

2D/3DPile-Supported Wharves

Response spectrum method

Pushover analysis and response spectrum methods

Cranes

Risk Management Framework

Acceptable risk procedure Value-focused thinking Socio-technical systems approach Structured deliberation and targeted

analysis Risk communication and perception

Risk Management Framework Define the decision problem and gather information on the port

system including stakeholders, physical infrastructure, and operational data

Elicit stakeholder objectives, define explicit systems-level performance measures and attributes, and define alternative means to achieve them

Evaluate the component and systems-level performance (i.e., consequences) of each alternative means including uncertainties

Present the results in a manner to enhance stakeholder comprehension, clarify underlying choices, and explicitly address tradeoffs

Iterate

Education, Outreach, and Training K-12 outreach programs Research Experience for

Undergraduates (REU) program targeted at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU)

Minority post-doctoral fellowships Industrial fellowship program

Documents

NEESR-GC: Seismic Risk Management for Port Systems Glenn J. Rix Georgia Institute of Technology