Grade Evaluation Method Research of Comprehensive Disaster Prevention Performance of Existing Buildi

Grade Evaluation Method Research of Comprehensive Disaster Prevention Performance of Existing Buildings Jinxing XU*1,2,3,4,a,Jingyan ZHANG1,2,3,b,Sijian ZHANG3,4,Hui YANG3,4,Jia WANG1,2,3 1

Disaster Prevention Research Center, Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, Beijing, 100013,

China; 2

China Academy of Building Research, Beijing, 100013, China;

3

Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Beijing, 100044, China;

4

Beijing Key Laboratory of Heating, Gas Supply, Ventilating and Air Conditioning Engineering, Beijing,

100044, China *ae-mail: buceaxujinxing@163.com; be-mail: cabrzjy@163.com

Abstract

(GBJ144-90) mechanically. It’s the appearance of Technical

Subjective and objective aspects of evaluating comprehensive disaster prevention performance of existing building are introduced in the paper, which includes main body of disaster prevention ability and the objective demand of disaster prevention level. The content researched by this paper can be the theoretical foundation of maintenance, transformation and consolidation of the buildings. Measures provided by the paper can be taken when the building structure and performance change in order to improve the using security level, which can avoid unnecessary losses.

Standard

for

Inspection [4]

(GB/T50344-2004)

of

Building

Structure

that influences the structural appraisal

measure of existing buildings.

The article assesses the various factors of the building, and draws the relevant specification of classification standard

and

evaluation

principles.

After

the

quantitative analysis of the performance of the buildings

integrated

disaster

prevention,

the

comprehensive disaster prevention performance level

Keywords

evaluation will be made eventually.

Existing Buildings; Comprehensive Disaster Prevention; Level; Evaluation;

Comprehensive

Disaster

Prevention

Performance Evaluation System of Main

Introduction

Body of Buildings

Disaster is an eternal topic of human society. The problems

Comprehensive disaster prevention performance of

caused by building security have become a hot issue in

buildings means the carrying capacity, infrastructure

recent years. A number of factors can influence the ability of

defense capacity and personnel strain capacity of the

the building to prevent disasters. However, there are no any

building when the earthquake, flood, fire disaster,

criterion that related to the prevention performance of

debris flow or other geological hazard will be handled.

existing buildings in China. Meanwhile, applied codes,

After appropriate appraisal, users of the building can

which are about building safety examinations, are unilateral.

choose the function according to their demand

Criteria for Reliability Appraisal of Industrial Buildings

rationally. The result of evaluation can be the criterion

(GBJ144-90)[1], released in the end of 1980s, are related to

of building management. At same time, the result is

the issues of durability and reliability of industrial factory

capable of leading the maintenance, consolidation and

buildings that are built in poor environment. Appraisal

transformation of the building.

Standard

Grading Standard

of

the

Civil

Construction

Reliability

[2]

(GB50292-1999) , published in the end of 1990s, and Standard of Dangerous Building Appraisal (JGJ125-99)[3]

Comprehensive disaster prevention performance can

apply the method of appraisal coming from Standard for

be divided into four levels according to the degree the

Criteria for Reliability Appraisal of Industrial Buildings

existing criterion building can meet. Level 1 means the

building is in the safe condition; level 2 stands for most

meantime, the standard reflects the psychological

safety; level 3 in equal to insecurity; the last level

measure

represents danger. Grading standard can describe the

consulting

real conditions of the building specifically. In the

prevention performance is concluded in Table 1.

of

changing

things.

literature,

Therefore,

comprehensive

after

disaster

Table 1 The Grading Standard of Comprehensive Disaster Prevention Performance Classification Level

Condition

Standard

Strategy

Interval The Condition accords with the requirements of the 1

Safe

(0.85,1]

current national standards. Results of appraisal are

No need to make a change

acceptable.

The Condition mostly accords with the requirements 2

Mostly Safe

(0.6,0.85]

of the current national standards. Results of

Some improvements are needed.

appraisal are acceptable basically.

The 3

Unsafe

(0.3,0.6]

Condition

does

not

accord

with

the

Some improvements are need quickly.

requirements of the current national standards.

Evaluation should be taken after

Results of appraisal are unacceptable.

The 4

Dangerous

Condition

does

not

accord

transformation. with

the

The

building

should

be

out

of

use

requirements of the current national standards

immediately. Effective measure should be

severely. Results of appraisal are completely

taken soon.

(0,0.3] unacceptable.

Table 1 is not only a standard of Grading Standard of comprehensive disaster prevention performance evaluation, but also a criterion of factors in the evaluative system. The grading interval should be paid enough attention when researchers are evaluating the factors of the system.

Combination of Evaluation System

are structure, infrastructure and human. The first grade of evaluation system concerns about the main building conditions, which could be taken as its structure, infrastructure and human who occupied the building. After integrating the influential factors, the combination of evaluation system can be concluded in Table 2.

The evaluation system includes three factors. They Table 2 Combination of Comprehensive Disaster Prevention Performance Evaluation System Foundation

Base, pile foundation, etc.

The Upper Bearing Structure

Wall, beam, plate, pillar, etc.

Structure Roof, suspended ceiling, interior wall, exterior wall, Envelop System door, windows, etc.

Water facility, power supply facility, communication

Comprehensive

Basic Infrastructure facility, alarm facility, transportation system, etc.

Disaster Prevention Performance

Fire-fighting equipment, seismic facility, installation of

Infrastructure Anti-disaster Facilities

windproof, etc.

Evaluation System Emergency Rescue Management

Emergency management, emergency rescue, etc.

Evacuation Space

Shelter, escape route, emergency exits, etc.

Staff Composition

Age, gender proportion, personnel density, etc.

Risk

Familiarity with the environment, cognitive ability, etc.

Due to the difference of buildings, the second grade

and the third grade can be adjusted appropriately

Human Evacuation

in terms of the real situation. Security condition, feasibility, durability and environmental characteristics should be taken into consideration when adjustment has to be made.

Evaluation process and Assessment Method Fuzzy membership function of fuzzy mathematics comprehensive evaluation method will be used in assessing quantitative evaluation result. Specific process is concluded in the following content.

Step 1

Step 2

Step 3

Grade the factors according to the results of evaluation, and then the level of every factor can be concluded.

Subsystem level can be assessed due to the result of evaluation of subsystem and the result of factor.

System level can be appraised in terms of the evaluation result of subsystem level.

Step 4

Comprehensive disaster prevention performance level can be summarized in accordance with the evaluation result of system level.

The Study of Demand of Objective Disaster Prevention Level

After integrating relevant literature[5-6] and existing criterion, which refers to the classification of building foundation and the security of structure, the objective classification method, which is also called objectively three-level method, is concluded.

The method reflects the social meaning of the building, the commercial value, service condition and investment excellently. Based on the four elements, objective criterion of assessing buildings has been summarized in Table 3.

Table 3 Objective Disaster Prevention Criterion of Assessing Buildings

Level

Type

Buildings National buildings with high importance,

1

Very important

high-rise buildings, buildings with life-protecting function;

General 2

Important

workshop; or low-rise buildings

General

3

Unimportan t

Reference Index

Classifications of Social Meaning

Commercial Value

Buildings with

Buildings with good

political and

location, buildings

Buildings with large

historical meanings,

with economic

scale; buildings with

buildings with

influence, or the

occupants, or

cultural influence, or

building with

buildings with high

memorable

strengthened brand

populations density;

buildings;

effect;

Buildings with

Buildings with

mostly political and

generally good

Buildings with

mostly huge,

historical meanings,

location, buildings

mostly large scale;

or the

buildings with

with mostly economic

buildings with

material

mostly cultural

influence, or the

occupants, or

inside the

influence, or

building with

buildings with high

building is

memorable

strengthened brand

populations density;

mostly

buildings;

effect;

Buildings without

warehouse,

political and

auxiliary building

historical meanings,

with few

buildings without

occupants or

cultural influence, or

temporary

unmemorable

buildings;

buildings;

To classify the buildings with previous criterion well, a scientific evaluation system has to be built.

Service Condition

Investment is huge, or the material inside the building is high-value;

Investment is

high-value; Investment

Buildings without good location,

Buildings without

buildings without

large scale; buildings

influence, or the

with low populations

building without

density;

brand effect;

Investment

costs less, or the material inside the building is not high-value;

As shown in Table 4, secondary-level grading method has been introduced. At the same time,

quantitative and objective assessment method is

concluded.

Table 4 Grading System of Objective Evaluation Method of Disaster Prevention of Buildings Layer

1

2

4

Name of Layer

System Level

Subsystem Level

Elements To Be Considered

Political Features Economic Features Social Meaning

Civilian Features

Grading System of

Commemorative

Objective Evaluation

Features

Administrative Bureau; Church; Penitentiary; Military Facilities; Radio Station; TV Station; Bank; Stock Exchanges; Enterprise Buildings; School; Hospital; Shopping Mall; Airport; Railway Station; Cinema; Base Station; Museum; Memorial Hall; Historical Relic Protecting Place;

Method of Disaster

Commercial

Locations

Surrounding Environment; Traffic Situations;

Prevention of Buildings

Value

Economic Influence

Popularity; Brand Effect; Market Scope;

Service

Architectural Scale

Durable Level; Dimension; Height; Space Utilization;

Condition

Occupants

Number of Staff; Density; Disadvantaged Groups;

Construction Cost

Design; Construction; Decoration; Auxiliary Facilities;

Investment

The Value of Inside Material

The Matching Study of the Disaster Prevention Ability of Buildings and the Demand of Objective Disaster Prevention Level

The matching study of the disaster prevention ability of buildings and the demand of objective disaster prevention level is raised by the paper.

The specific flow chart of the study shows in Fig.1.

The priority of the need of objective disaster prevention leads the appraisal, because of the existence of buildings. The ability of main body disaster prevention has to meet the need of objective disaster prevention. According to the partition method of objective fireproofing requirement, quoted from Code for Design of Building Foundation (GB50007-2011)[7], which needs requirement from the main elements in terms of different levels, the detailed requirement can be expressed in the following contents.

The building, whose objective disaster prevention is level 1, has to have first-degree comprehensive disaster prevention ability.

Meanwhile, some non-bearing and unimportant

Stuff; Material; Collected Books; Historical Relic; Antique;

elements with second-degree disaster prevention ability are permitted. But the total proportion has to be less than 20%.

The building, whose objective disaster prevention is level 2, has to have second-degree comprehensive disaster prevention ability.

Meanwhile, some non-bearing and unimportant elements with third-degree disaster prevention ability are permitted. But the total proportion has to be less than 20%. Dangerous element has to be replaceable, recoverable and able to be consolidated.

The building, whose objective disaster prevention is level 3, has to have third-degree comprehensive disaster prevention ability.

Meanwhile, some non-bearing and unimportant elements with fourth-degree disaster prevention ability are permitted. But the total proportion has to be less than 20%. Dangerous element has to be replaceable, recoverable and consolidated.

There is no building whose objective disaster prevention need is danger. Therefore the dangerous building, whose objective disaster prevention is level 4, has to have third-degree comprehensive disaster prevention ability.

Fig.1 Flow Chart of the Matching Study

Conclusion

Based on the need of comprehensive disaster prevention performance, the paper investigates the ability of main body disaster prevention and evaluation of objective disaster prevention requirement. The applied method of two main investigating targets has been concluded.

Three-layer evaluation method, which includes structure, infrastructure and human evacuation, and grading standard are erected. Objective assessment Method involves social meaning, commercial value, service condition and investment. Four elements divide the existing buildings into three levels, which are corresponding to the levels of the ability of main body disaster prevention. At the end of the paper, specific matching method of the Disaster Prevention Ability of Buildings and the Demand of Objective Disaster Prevention Level is introduced. We hope the paper can assist relevant researchers in the disaster-preventing area.

Research Development Collaboration Post Graduate Training Centre (Grant No: cxy2014031), and China Academy of Building Research self-raised foundation (Grant No: 20110106330730001) named “The Research of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Technology System about the urban construction engineering�. The authors deeply appreciate their support.

Reference [1] Criteria for Reliability Appraisal of Industrial Buildings (GBJ144-90),In Chinese [2] Appraisal Standard of the Civil Construction Reliability (GB50292-1999),In Chinese [3]

of

Dangerous

Buildings

Appraisal

(JGJ125-99),In Chinese [4] Technical Standard for Inspection of Building Structure (GB/T50344-2004),In Chinese [5] Wang Yongwei. The Exploration on Importance Grade Assessment of Public Buildings Base on Safety Design [D].Chongqing:ChongQing University.2007 [6] Wang Guangjun.Building the Rules and Regulations of Classification of Importance and Application to

Acknowledgment

This research is sponsored by BUCEA Urban Rural Construction and Management Industry

Standard

Consider[J].Sichuan Building Science.1992(2):18-22 [7]

Code

for

Design

of

(GB50007-2011),In Chinese

Building

Foundation