Comprehensive evaluation of urban earthquake vulnerability under the framework of PSR
-
摘要: 为了科学评价城市地震灾害状况，降低城市易损性，基于压力-状态-响应模型框架，构建城市地震综合易损性评价指标体系，其中压力类、状态类、响应类指标分别为7、13、8项。应用熵权法确定了各评价指标的权重，提出基于云模型的城市综合易损性评价模型，并运用雷达图分析法实现城市内各个区综合易损性的相对高低。应用上述方法，对兰州市中心城区进行了震害综合易损性评价，结果表明：兰州市综合易损性等级偏向Ⅲ级，易损性中等，其中红古、安宁区的易损性程度较高，城关、七里河易损性程度较低；经济因素对各区域的易损性影响较大，通过对易损区域加强管理建设，提高城市的防震减灾能力。Abstract: Assessment indicator system of comprehensive earthquake vulnerability in cities is established, which is aimed to reduce the vulnerability in cities, for the purpose to conduct scientific evaluation on earthquake vulnerability.The system is based on pressure-state-response (PSR) model framework, respectively the indicator is 7, 13 and 8 items. The assessment model of comprehensive earthquake vulnerability in cities, based on cloud model, is brought up by determine the weights of each indicator through the method of entropy weight. At the same time, radar maps are applied to analyse the relativity of comprehensive vulnerability in different districts in cities. An evaluation on comprehensive vulnerability after earthquake damage in center districts in Lanzhou was conducted by application of above mentioned methods. The result shows that comprehensive vulnerability in Lanzhou deviates to level Ⅲ with a medium vulnerability. Honggu and Anning Districts suffer from higher vulnerability while Chengguan and Qilihe Districts bear the lower. In addition, economic elements have a rather prominent impact on the vulnerability in the various districts. Reinforcing management and construction in more vulnerable districts can improve their capacity in the act of earthquake prevention and disaster reduction.
-
图 1 兰州中心城区综合易损性云图
Figure 1. Comprehensive vulnerability cloud map of center districts in Lanzhou
图 2 兰州中心城市各区域综合易损性雷达图
Figure 2. Radar map of comprehensive vulnerability of various regions in central districts of Lanzhou
表 1 城市地震综合易损性评价指标体系
Table 1. Evaluation index system for comprehensive vulnerability of urban earthquake
属性 一级指标 二级指标 指标计算说明 指标属性 压力(B1) 自然因素C1 城市近源地震等效等级C11 反映地震灾害危险度指数g + 人为因素C2 城市化率C21 城镇人口占人口总数比例/% + 年平均自然增长率C22 年平均自然增长率/% + 人口密度C23 人口密度/(人·km−2) + 建筑物密度C24 建筑物的基底面积占规划建设面积比例/% + 老旧建筑物比例C25 老旧建筑物数量占建筑物数量比例/% + 容积率C26 地上总建筑面积占可建设用地面积比例/% + 状态(B2) 生命线系统C3 交通系统C31 公路网综合能力/(104 m2) − 通讯系统C32 电信业务收入/万元 − 供电系统C33 供电量/万千瓦时 − 供水系统C34 供水总量、用水总量/(104 m3) − 供气系统C35 供气总量/m3 − 社会状态C4 14～65岁人口比例C41 14～65岁人口比例/% − 失业率C42 失业人数占人口总数比例/% + 教育C43 人均教育费用支出/元 − 医疗C44 人均医疗卫生费用支出/元 + 经济状态C5 人均GDP C51 GDP/% − 人均GDP增长率C52 人均GDP增长率/% − 可支配收入C53 人均可支配收入/元 − 经济多样性C54 第三产业构成比例/% − 响应(B3) 工程抗震C6 建筑物抗震能力C61 2002年以后的建筑物占总建筑物比例/% − 构筑物抗震能力C62 2013年以后的构筑物占总建筑物比例/% − 回复能力C7 医疗救助能力C71 病床数和医生数/10万人 − 社会保障C72 人均抚恤和社会福利救济费/元 − 地方财政收入C73 年末财政收入/万元 − 应急避难所覆盖度C74 学校数和广场数/个 − 避震减灾知识普及率C75 − − 政府应急反应能力C76 − − 注：指标属性中，“＋”代表越大越优（正向）指标，“−”代表越小越优（逆向）指标。 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 评价等级数字特征表
Table 2. Digital characteristic of evaluation level
评价等级 取值区间 综合易损性 数字特征 Ⅰ [0.0,0.2) 低 (0.1,0.085,0.01) Ⅱ [0.2,0.4) 较低 (0.3,0.085,0.01) Ⅲ [0.4,0.6) 中等 (0.5,0.085,0.01) Ⅳ [0.6,0.8) 较高 (0.7,0.085,0.01) Ⅴ [0.8,1.0] 高 (0.9,0.085,0.01)
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 兰州市5个中心城区的基础数据统计
Table 3. Basic data statistics of five central urban districtsin Lanzhou City
指标 C11 C21 C22 C23 C24 C25 C26 C31 C32 C33 城关区 0.200 99.120 0.030 6332.000 13.120 6.230 4.800 624.660 239568.750 102878.160 七里河区 0.200 83.610 0.360 1458.000 15.560 15.300 3.800 1153.230 117122.500 45088.580 西固区 0.200 87.280 0.110 1023.000 17.890 17.750 3.670 1105.180 101151.250 29424.000 安宁区 0.200 100.000 0.000 3443.000 20.860 19.010 3.190 288.310 42590.000 23285.180 红古区 0.150 78.170 0.400 263.000 27.120 26.100 3.100 1633.740 31942.500 11007.540 指标 C34 C35 C41 C42 C43 C44 C51 C52 C53 C54 城关区 8950.359 2041.200 82.400 1.910 1188.000 1009.000 72396.000 6.900 36326.000 86.300 七里河区 3922.685 894.600 82.100 1.960 1324.000 1124.000 79074.000 6.000 28534.000 62.600 西固区 2559.875 583.800 81.300 2.010 1751.000 1487.000 110782.000 4.300 33150.000 38.200 安宁区 2025.805 462.000 83.600 1.830 935.000 794.000 59814.000 6.600 32574.000 61.500 红古区 957.650 218.400 85.600 3.150 1488.000 1264.000 92080.000 8.600 25720.000 31.000 指标 C61 C62 C71 C72 C73 C74 C75 C76 城关区 82.050 28.950 1270.055 7709.000 400518.000 438.000 85.360 76.470 七里河区 55.200 17.030 1247.305 6141.000 210098.000 231.000 71.050 66.320 西固区 48.970 11.750 566.395 6338.000 124664.000 144.000 68.360 63.100 安宁区 36.440 11.250 362.895 5370.000 117027.000 96.000 66.070 60.560 红古区 32.320 7.260 854.675 4657.000 52393.000 54.000 56.320 41.180
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 兰州市5个中心城区统计数据的无量纲化处理
Table 4. Dimensionless of statistical data of five central urban districts of Lanzhou
指标 C11 C21 C22 C23 C24 C25 C26 C31 C32 C33 城关区 1.000 0.991 0.075 1.000 0.484 0.239 1.000 0.618 0.000 0.000 七里河区 1.000 0.836 0.900 0.230 0.574 0.586 0.792 0.294 0.511 0.562 西固区 1.000 0.873 0.275 0.162 0.660 0.680 0.765 0.324 0.578 0.714 安宁区 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.544 0.769 0.728 0.665 0.824 0.822 0.774 红古区 0.750 0.782 1.000 0.042 1.000 1.000 0.646 0.000 0.867 0.893 指标 C34 C35 C41 C42 C43 C44 C51 C52 C53 C54 城关区 0.000 0.000 0.037 0.606 0.322 0.679 0.347 0.198 0.000 0.000 七里河区 0.562 0.562 0.041 0.622 0.244 0.756 0.286 0.302 0.215 0.275 西固区 0.714 0.714 0.050 0.638 0.000 1.000 0.000 0.500 0.087 0.557 安宁区 0.774 0.774 0.023 0.581 0.466 0.534 0.460 0.233 0.103 0.287 红古区 0.893 0.893 0.000 1.000 0.150 0.850 0.169 0.000 0.292 0.641 指标 C61 C62 C71 C72 C73 C74 C75 C76 城关区 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 七里河区 0.327 0.412 0.018 0.203 0.475 0.473 0.168 0.133 西固区 0.403 0.594 0.554 0.178 0.689 0.671 0.199 0.175 安宁区 0.556 0.611 0.714 0.303 0.708 0.781 0.226 0.208 红古区 0.606 0.749 0.327 0.396 0.869 0.877 0.340 0.461
下载: 导出CSV
表 5 兰州中心城区地震综合易损性评价云数字特征
Table 5. Cloud characteristic for comprehensive evaluation of earthquake vulnerability in center districts of Lanzhou
总指标 数字特征 一级指标 权重 数字特征 二级指标 权重 数字特征 城市综合易损性评价 （0.554,0.210,0.088） C1 0.030 （0.950,0.100,0.050） C11 0.030 （0.950,0.100,0.050） C2 0.155 （0.626,0.278,0.103） C21 0.021 （0.896,0.099,0.025） C22 0.039 （0.450,0.501,0.178） C23 0.018 （0.395,0.377,0.079） C24 0.038 （0.697,0.188,0.067） C25 0.025 （0.647,0.235,0.143） C26 0.014 （0.773,0.123,0.070） C3 0.228 （0.552,0.307,0.150） C31 0.039 （0.412,0.310,0.070） C32 0.045 （0.556,0.301,0.171） C33 0.050 （0.588,0.308,0.165） C34 0.046 （0.588,0.308,0.165） C35 0.048 （0.588,0.308,0.165） C4 0.124 （0.491,0.086,0.042） C41 0.018 （0.030,0.019,0.006） C42 0.050 （0.690,0.156,0.080） C43 0.038 （0.236,0.162,0.069） C44 0.018 （0.764,0.162,0.069） C5 0.148 （0.508,0.113,0.032） C51 0.051 （0.252,0.168,0.051） C52 0.018 （0.247,0.155,0.093） C53 0.031 （0.139,0.114,0.009） C54 0.048 （0.352,0.248,0.060） C6 0.074 （0.423,0.240,0.108） C61 0.039 （0.378,0.215,0.105） C62 0.035 （0.473,0.268,0.112） C7 0.241 （0.562,0.201,0.077） C71 0.044 （0.323,0.314,0.046） C72 0.021 （0.216,0.134,0.064） C73 0.055 （0.548,0.311,0.129） C74 0.028 （0.560,0.325,0.123） C75 0.049 （0.187,0.103,0.067） C76 0.044 （0.195,0.140,0.094）
下载: 导出CSV
表 6 兰州中心城市各区域的特征量计算结果
Table 6. The calculation results of the characteristic quantity of various regions in central districts of Lanzhou
城市区 平均面积/km2 平均周长/km ${\overline V _x}$ ${Y_x}$ 排序 城关区 0.3701 7.4486 0.0838 0.1761 5 七里河区 0.6179 8.5295 0.1067 0.2564 4 西固区 0.7862 10.6816 0.0865 0.2608 3 安宁区 0.9320 8.7303 0.1536 0.3781 2 红古区 1.2234 11.4304 0.1176 0.3791 1
下载: 导出CSV
-
孙龙飞. 城市地震灾害损失评估方法及系统开发研究[D]. 西安: 西安建筑科技大学, 2016.SUN Longfei. Research on the earthquake disaster loss assessment method for urban areasand systemdevelopment[D]. Xi'an: Xi'an University of Architecture and Technology, 2016. (in Chinese with English abstract) DUZGUN H S B, YUCEMEN M S, KALAYCIOGLU H S, et al. An integrated earthquake vulnerability assessment framework for urban areas[J]. Natural Hazards,2011,59(2):917 − 947. doi: 10.1007/s11069-011-9808-6 PASTICIER L, AMADIO C, FRAGIACOMO M. Non-linear seismic analysis and vulnerability evaluation of a masonry building by means of the SAP2000 V.10 code[J]. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics,2008,37(3):467 − 485. 苏亮, 向畅, 蒋亦庞. 基于模糊相似理论的地震易损性分析方法[J]. 华中科技大学学报(自然科学版),2017,45(8):74 − 80. [SU Liang, XIANG Chang, JIANG Yipang. New earthquake loss assessment methodology based on fuzzy similarity theory[J]. Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology (Natural Science Edition),2017,45(8):74 − 80. (in Chinese with English abstract) 臧石磊, 冯石, 李玉森, 等. 基于模糊综合评判法的辽宁省老旧砌体房屋震害预测[J]. 地震研究,2019,42(2):166 − 171. [ZANG Shilei, FENG Shi, LI Yusen, et al. Seismic damage prediction of old masonry buildings in Liaoning Province based on fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method[J]. Journal of Seismological Research,2019,42(2):166 − 171. (in Chinese with English abstract) 毕可为. 群体建筑的易损性分析和地震损失快速评估[D]. 大连: 大连理工大学, 2009.BI Kewei. Vulnerability analysis of group buildings and earthquake loss fast estimation[D]. Dalian: Dalian University of Technology, 2009. (in Chinese with English abstract) 刘德玉, 贾贵义, 李松, 等. 地形因素对白龙江流域甘肃段泥石流灾害的影响及权重分析[J]. 水文地质工程地质,2019,46(3):33 − 39. [LIU Deyu, JIA Guiyi, LI Song, et al. Impacts of topographical factors on debris flows and weight analysis at the Gansu segment of the Bailongjiang River Basin[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology,2019,46(3):33 − 39. (in Chinese with English abstract) 黄仁东, 吴寒, 张惕, 等. 基于云模型的岩溶隧道涌水灾害危险性评价及其在青岩头隧道的应用[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2018,29(5):44 − 51. [HUANG Rendong, WU Han, ZHANG Ti, et al. Evaluation of water burst hazard in karst tunnel based on cloud model and its application in Qingyantou Tunnel[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2018,29(5):44 − 51. (in Chinese with English abstract) 尹之潜. 城市地震危害性分析的基本框架和方法[J]. 地震工程与工程振动,1999,19(1):70 − 75. [YIN Zhiqian. Basic framework of urban earthquake risk analysis[J]. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration,1999,19(1):70 − 75. (in Chinese with English abstract) 叶清. 地震危险性、地震危害性和地震易损性[J]. 福建地震,2003(2):38 − 40. [YE Qing. Seismic risk, seismic hazard and seismic friability[J]. Fujian Seismology,2003(2):38 − 40. (in Chinese with English abstract) 刘雅玲, 罗雅谦, 张文静, 等. 基于压力—状态—响应模型的城市水资源承载力评价指标体系构建研究[J]. 环境污染与防治,2016,38(5):100 − 104. [LIU Yaling, LUO Yaqian, ZHANG Wenjing, et al. The construction of urban water resources carrying capacity evaluation system based on PSR model[J]. Environmental Pollution & Control,2016,38(5):100 − 104. (in Chinese with English abstract) 陈丹羽. 基于压力-状态-响应模型的城市韧性评估[D]. 武汉: 华中科技大学, 2019.CHEN Danyu. Urban resilience assessment based on pressure-state- response model[D]. Wuhan: Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 2019. (in Chinese with English abstract) 李琳, 王俊杰. 四川省城市地震灾害脆弱性综合评价研究[J]. 震灾防御技术,2018,13(4):968 − 977. [LI Lin, WANG Junjie. Comprehensive evaluation of urban earthquake disaster vulnerability in Sichuan Province[J]. Technology for Earthquake Disaster Prevention,2018,13(4):968 − 977. (in Chinese with English abstract) 蒋汝成, 顾世祥. 熵权法-正态云模型在云南省水生态承载力评价中的应用[J]. 水资源与水工程学报,2018,29(3):118 − 123. [JIANG Rucheng, GU Shixiang. Application of entropy weight-normal cloud model in carrying capacity evaluation of water ecological environment in Yunnan Province[J]. Journal of Water Resources and Water Engineering,2018,29(3):118 − 123. (in Chinese with English abstract) 杨光, 刘敦文, 褚夫蛟, 等. 基于云模型的隧道塌方风险等级评价[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术,2015,11(6):95 − 101. [YANG Guang, LIU Dunwen, CHU Fujiao, et al. Evaluation on risk grade of tunnel collapse based on cloud model[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology,2015,11(6):95 − 101. (in Chinese with English abstract) 邓禄军, 夏锦慧, 卢扬, 等. 雷达图分析法在马铃薯品种特征综合评价中的应用[J]. 贵州农业科学,2013,41(7):59 − 62. [DENG Lujun, XIA Jinhui, LU Yang, et al. Application of radar chart method in comprehensive evaluation on varietal characteristics of potato[J]. Guizhou Agricultural Sciences,2013,41(7):59 − 62. (in Chinese with English abstract) 中华人民共和国建设部、国家质量监督检验检疫总局. 建筑抗震设计规范: GB 50011—2001[S]. 北京: 中国建筑工业出版社, 2004.General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People's Republic of China. Code for seismic design of buildings: GB 50011—2001[S]. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press, 2004. (in Chinese) -
点击查看大图
图(2) / 表(6)
计量
- 文章访问数: 75
- HTML全文浏览量: 54
- PDF下载量: 40
- 被引次数: 0
邮件订阅
RSS