Rapid screening and evaluation of existing buildings
First PUP President Lecture Series in Science and Technology
2007
- 8Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage8
- Abstract Views8
Conference Paper Description
Two rapid assessment procedures will be discussed in this paper - the "Pre-Earthquake Evaluation of Existing Buildings", and the "Post-Earthquake Evaluation of Existing Buildings." The first evaluation procedure is using the standard forms found in the Handbook developed by the Applied Technology Council, with funding from the Federal Management Agency (FEMA). The report submitted by ATC to FEMA is known as "Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings for Potential Seismic Hazards: A Handbook".The other assessment procedure is by the use of the "Rapid Evaluation Safety Assessment Form". Said form was adopted by the ASEP-PICE DQRP Program. This program is a post earthquake damaged assessment program of the Association of Structural Engineers of the Philippines, the Philippine Institute of Civil Engineers, and the Office of the Civil Defense - National Disaster Coordinating Council.An actual sample on the use of this form is presented to give readers a full account on how these forms are accomplished as well as how data are interpreted and finally given the assessment required. This assessment of structural integrity of the structure will help us decide on which of these structures will be needing immediate attention in terms of repair or retrofitting or which ones may be scheduled later for possible more detailed assessment.Further, excerpts from the report of the DQRP Team composing of PICE and ASEP Volunteer inspectors during the conducted rapid evaluation of buildings affected by the March 6, 2002 earthquake is presented. This report covers the extent of damage caused by the magnitude 6.8 earthquake that hit Southern Mindanao at 5:15 in the morning. The author is a member of this team that performed such assessment under the Disaster Quick Response Program (DQRP)
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know