Technical Papers
Mar 23, 2020

Probabilistic Hurricane Wind-Induced Loss Model for Risk Assessment on a Regional Scale

Publication: ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part A: Civil Engineering
Volume 6, Issue 2

Abstract

Hurricane hazard is one of the major causes of the loss of life and property. It has recently led to enormous economic losses and social disruption, specifically in coastal regions. Monetary loss and damage to the built infrastructure represent a significant portion of overall hurricane-induced financial losses. A detailed simulation of hurricane loss at a regional scale requires a large amount of specific information, which is usually not available with a sufficient level of certainty. The existing wind-induced loss models often assume a prescribed mathematical structure to describe the dependency between aggregated loss and hazard intensity in an average sense. The effect of uncertainty is introduced by treating model parameters as random variables. In the present study, a new approach to tackle this problem is introduced, which relies on a more rigorous and reliable quantification of the associated uncertainties. In particular, the loss induced by wind is modeled as a nonstationary stochastic process for which a probabilistic representation is constructed using polynomial expansion. As a case study, economic loss data collected by an insurance company are used to calibrate and test the predictive capability of the proposed stochastic hurricane loss model. This representation has the advantage of being based on minimal prior assumptions and constraints, in addition to being computationally less demanding because it generates the vulnerability at a coarser regional level. In order to quantify the regional risk from the proposed loss model, an extension to the evaluation of the storm risk curve or loss-exceedance curve for the region is presented.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data analyzed during the present study are provided by ICAT Catastrophe Insurance and are openly available from the ICAT Damage Estimator (http://www.icatdamageestimator.com) (ICAT 2018). The codes generated and used in the study are available from the corresponding author by request.

References

Aghababaei, M., M. Koliou, and S. G. Paal. 2018. “Performance assessment of building infrastructure impacted by the 2017 Hurricane Harvey in the Port Aransas region.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 32 (5): 04018069. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0001215.
Bommer, J., R. Spence, M. Erdik, S. Tabuchi, N. Aydinoglu, E. Booth, D. Del Re, and O. Peterken. 2002. “Development of an earthquake loss model for Turkish catastrophe insurance.” J. Seismol. 6 (3): 431–446. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020095711419.
Bushra, N., J. C. Trepanier, and R. V. Rohli. 2019. “Joint probability risk modelling of storm surge and cyclone wind along the coast of Bay of Bengal using a statistical copula.” Int. J. Climatol. 39 (11): 4206–4217. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.6068.
Chambers, J. M. 2017. Graphical methods for data analysis. New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC.
Csiszár, I. 1967. “Information-type measures of difference of probability distributions and indirect observation.” Studia Scientiarum Mathematicarum Hungarica 2: 229–318.
Evans, J. L., B. F. Ryan, and J. L. McGregor. 1994. “A numerical exploration of the sensitivity of tropical cyclone rainfall intensity to sea surface temperature.” J. Clim. 7 (4): 616–623. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1994)007%3C0616:ANEOTS%3E2.0.CO;2.
Friedman, D. G. 1975. Vol. 2 of Computer simulation in natural hazard assessment. Boulder, CO: Univ. of Colorado Boulder.
Ghanem, R. G., and P. D. Spanos. 2003. Stochastic finite elements—A spectral approach. New York: Springer.
Hendrick, R. L., D. G. Friedman, and W. Sewell. 1966. “Potential impacts of storm modification on the insurance industry.” In Human dimensions of weather modification, edited by W. R. D. Sewell, 227–248. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Heneka, P., and B. Ruck. 2008. “A damage model for the assessment of storm damage to buildings.” Eng. Struct. 30 (12): 3603–3609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.06.005.
Howard, R. A., J. E. Matheson, and D. W. North. 1972. “The decision to seed hurricanes.” Science 176 (4040): 1191–1202. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.176.4040.1191.
ICAT (International Catastrophe) Insurance Managers. 2018. “Damage estimator.” Accessed August 15, 2019. http://www.icatdamageestimator.com.
Ishizaki, H. 1965. “The distributions of damaged houses and strong winds by typhoons.” Bull. Disaster Prev. Res. Inst. 15 (1): 1–5.
Jordan, M. R., and C. A. Clayson. 2008. “A new approach to using wind speed for prediction of tropical cyclone generated storm surge.” Geophys. Res. Lett. 35 (13): L13802. https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL033564.
Katz, R. W. 2002. “Stochastic modeling of hurricane damage.” J. Appl. Meteorol. 41 (7): 754–762. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(2002)041%3C0754:SMOHD%3E2.0.CO;2.
Khanduri, A., and G. Morrow. 2003. “Vulnerability of buildings to windstorms and insurance loss estimation.” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (4): 455–467. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6105(02)00408-7.
Kullback, S., and R. A. Leibler. 1951. “On information and sufficiency.” Ann. Math. Stat. 22 (1): 79–86. https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177729694.
Kunreuther, H., R. Meyer, C. Van den Bulte, and R. E. Chapman. 2004. Risk analysis for extreme events: Economic incentives for reducing future losses. Gaithersburg, MD: US Dept. of Commerce.
Leicester, R., and G. R. Reardon. 1976. “A statistical analysis of the structural damage by Cyclone Tracy.” In Proc., Annual Engineering Conf.: Engineering 1976–2001, 242. Barton, Australia: Institution of Engineers.
Li, Y., J. W. van de Lindt, T. Dao, S. Bjarnadottir, and A. Ahuja. 2011. “Loss analysis for combined wind and surge in hurricanes.” Nat. Hazard. Rev. 13 (1): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000058.
Lonfat, M., R. Rogers, T. Marchok, and F. D. Marks Jr. 2007. “A parametric model for predicting hurricane rainfall.” Mon. Weather Rev. 135 (9): 3086–3097. https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR3433.1.
Mudd, L., D. Rosowsky, C. Letchford, and F. Lombardo. 2016. “Joint probabilistic wind–rainfall model for tropical cyclone hazard characterization.” J. Struct. Eng. 143 (3): 04016195. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001685.
Munich RE (Münchener Rückversicherungs-Gesellschaft). 2018. Topics geo: Natural catastrophes 2017: Analysis, assessment. München, Germany: Munich RE.
NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2019. “National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) U.S. billion-dollar weather and climate disasters.” Accessed August 15, 2019. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billions.
Noshadravan, A., T. R. Miller, and J. G. Gregory. 2017. “A lifecycle cost analysis of residential buildings including natural hazard risk.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 143 (7): 04017017. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001286.
Pei, B., W. Pang, F. Testik, and N. Ravichandran. 2013. “Joint distributions of hurricane wind and storm surge for the city of Charleston in South Carolina.” In Proc., 2012 ATC and SEI Conf. on Advances in Hurricane Engineering: Learning from Our Past, 703–714. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Peterka, J. A., and S. Shahid. 1998. “Design gust wind speeds in the United States.” J. Struct. Eng. 124 (2): 207–214. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1998)124:2(207).
Petra Low. 2019. “The natural disasters of 2018 in figures.” Munich Reinsurance Company, Munich. Accessed August 15, 2019. https://www.munichre.com/topics-online/en/climate-change-and-natural-disasters/natural-disasters/the-natural-disasters-of-2018-in-figures.html.
Pielke, R. A., J. Gratz, C. W. Landsea, D. Collins, M. A. Saunders, and R. Musulin. 2008. “Normalized hurricane damage in the United States: 1900–2005.” Nat. Hazard. Rev. 9 (1): 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1527-6988(2008)9:1(29).
Pita, G., J.-P. Pinelli, K. Gurley, and J. Mitrani-Reiser. 2014. “State of the art of hurricane vulnerability estimation methods: A review.” Nat. Hazard. Rev. 16 (2): 04014022. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000153.
Pita, G. L., J.-P. Pinelli, K. R. Gurley, and S. Hamid. 2013. “Hurricane vulnerability modeling: Development and future trends.” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 114 (Mar): 96–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2012.12.004.
Rootzén, H., and N. Tajvidi. 1997. “Extreme value statistics and wind storm losses: A case study.” Scandinavian Actuarial J. 1997 (1): 70–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/03461238.1997.10413979.
Sakamoto, S., and R. Ghanem. 2002. “Polynomial chaos decomposition for the simulation of non-Gaussian nonstationary stochastic processes.” J. Eng. Mech. 128 (2): 190–201. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2002)128:2(190).
Sill, B. L., and R. T. Kozlowski. 1997. “Analysis of storm-damage factors for low-rise structures.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 11 (4): 168–177. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(1997)11:4(168).
Sparks, P. R. 1993. “Relationship between residential insurance losses and wind conditions in Hurricane Andrew.” In Hurricanes of 1992: Lessons learned and implications for the future, edited by R. A. Cook, 111–124. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Tomiczek, T., A. Kennedy, Y. Zhang, M. Owensby, M. E. Hope, N. Lin, and A. Flory. 2017. “Hurricane damage classification methodology and fragility functions derived from Hurricane Sandy’s effects in coastal New Jersey.” J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, Ocean Eng. 143 (5): 04017027. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)WW.1943-5460.0000409.
Unnikrishnan, V. U., and M. Barbato. 2017. “Multihazard interaction effects on the performance of low-rise wood-frame housing in hurricane-prone regions.” J. Struct. Eng. 143 (8): 04017076. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001797.
Walker, G. R. 2011. “Modelling the vulnerability of buildings to wind—A review.” Can. J. Civ. Eng. 38 (9): 1031–1039. https://doi.org/10.1139/l11-047.
Wang, C., H. Zhang, K. Feng, and Q. Li. 2017. “Assessing hurricane damage costs in the presence of vulnerability model uncertainty.” Nat. Hazards 85 (3): 1621–1635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2651-z.
Watson, C. C., Jr., and M. E. Johnson. 2004. “Hurricane loss estimation models: Opportunities for improving the state of the art.” Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 85 (11): 1713–1726. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-85-11-1713.
Xiu, D., and G. E. Karniadakis. 2002. “The Wiener–Askey polynomial chaos for stochastic differential equations.” SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 24 (2): 619–644. https://doi.org/10.1137/S1064827501387826.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part A: Civil Engineering
ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part A: Civil Engineering
Volume 6Issue 2June 2020

History

Received: Aug 20, 2019
Accepted: Dec 12, 2019
Published online: Mar 23, 2020
Published in print: Jun 1, 2020
Discussion open until: Aug 23, 2020

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Ph.D. Student, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1439-6053. Email: [email protected]
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843 (corresponding author). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6467-5689. Email: [email protected]

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

Cited by

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share