Earthquake Risk and Engineering towards a Resilient World

9 - 10 July 2015, Homerton College, Cambridge, UK

Overview

SECED 2015 was a two-day conference on Earthquake and Civil Engineering Dynamics that took place on 9-10th July 2015 at Homerton College, Cambridge.

This was the first major conference to be held in the UK on this topic since SECED hosted the 2002 European Conference on Earthquake Engineering in London.

The conference brought together experts from a broad range of disciplines, including structural engineering, nuclear engineering, seismology, geology, geotechnical engineering, urban development, social sciences, business and insurance; all focused on risk, mitigation and recovery.

Conference themes

  • Geotechnical earthquake engineering
  • Seismic design for nuclear facilities
  • Seismic hazard and engineering seismology
  • Masonry structures
  • Risk and catastrophe modelling
  • Vibrations, blast and civil engineering dynamics
  • Dams and hydropower
  • Seismic assessment and retrofit of engineered and non-engineered structures
  • Social impacts and community recovery

Keynote speakers

SECED 2015 featured the following keynote speakers (affiliations correct at the time of the conference):

  • Peter Ford and Tim Allmark, Office for Nuclear Regulation, UK
  • Don Anderson, CH2M HILL, Seattle, USA
  • Bernard Dost, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute, The Netherlands
  • Anne Kiremidjian, Stanford University, USA
  • Rob May, Golder Associates, Australia
  • Tiziana Rossetto, University College London, UK
  • Andrew Whittaker, University at Buffalo, USA
  • Mike Willford, Arup, The Netherlands
Category: Risk and catastrophe modelling
Year: 2015
File: SILVA.pdf

Hits: 3085

Review

Without a proper understanding of the potential human and economic losses for a given region, the development of risk mitigation strategies is likely to be ill-informed and inadequate, and consequently tragic should a damaging seismic event occur. The study presented herein sheds light on several problems and limitations in the current practice of earthquake loss modelling, and provides recommendations depending on the intended final use of the risk analyses. Results using the Metropolitan Area of Lisbon (Portugal) demonstrate that distinct assumptions in the loss modelling may lead to considerably different risk results (often varying by a factor of two), which highlights the need to fully comprehend the implications of following certain modelling approaches. The findings of this study are also relevant for institutions that promote the assessment of earthquake risk in various parts of the world, such as the Global Earthquake Model Foundation.

Tags: SECED 2015  
Date insert:
Go to top