Kerangka Rapid Visual Screening Berbasis Indeks Risiko untuk Penilaian Sistematis Kerentanan Seismik Bangunan Publik
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Bangunan publik merupakan elemen infrastruktur vital yang berperan penting dalam keberlangsungan layanan esensial saat dan setelah bencana gempa bumi, khususnya di wilayah berkembang dengan tingkat seismisitas tinggi. Namun demikian, banyak bangunan publik belum dievaluasi secara sistematis menggunakan pendekatan kuantitatif berbasis indeks risiko, sehingga prioritisasi mitigasi dan penguatan struktur sering kali tidak berbasis bukti yang terukur. Kesenjangan ini menunjukkan perlunya kerangka penilaian kerentanan seismik yang efisien, konsisten, dan aplikatif pada skala bangunan individual. Penelitian ini bertujuan menilai tingkat kerentanan seismik bangunan publik terhadap bencana gempa bumi secara kuantitatif. Penelitian ini dilakukan pada sejumlah bangunan publik di wilayah rawan gempa menggunakan data primer hasil survei lapangan. Pendekatan Rapid Visual Screening (RVS) diterapkan untuk mengumpulkan parameter struktural utama, yang selanjutnya diintegrasikan dengan metode risk index scoring untuk menghitung indeks kerentanan seismik. Analisis kuantitatif dilakukan terhadap klasifikasi risiko, perbandingan parameter struktural, serta uji konsistensi dan sensitivitas. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa 68% bangunan publik berada pada kategori risiko sedang hingga tinggi, dengan skor kerentanan rata-rata sebesar 0,74, dan bangunan berusia lebih dari 30 tahun memiliki tingkat risiko yang secara signifikan lebih tinggi. Temuan ini menegaskan bahwa integrasi RVS dan indeks risiko mampu menyediakan penilaian kerentanan yang stabil dan terukur. Secara keseluruhan, penelitian ini memberikan kontribusi metodologis dan empiris terhadap pengembangan penilaian risiko seismik serta mendukung pengambilan keputusan berbasis risiko dalam upaya peningkatan ketahanan infrastruktur publik
Abstract
Public buildings constitute critical infrastructure that ensures the continuity of essential services during and after earthquake events, particularly in developing regions characterized by high seismicity. Nevertheless, many public buildings have not been systematically evaluated using quantitative risk-based approaches, resulting in mitigation and retrofit decisions that are often insufficiently evidence-based. This gap highlights the need for an efficient, consistent, and building-level seismic vulnerability assessment framework. This study aims to quantitatively assess the seismic vulnerability of public buildings exposed to earthquake hazards. The research was conducted on a set of public buildings located in a seismically active area using primary data collected through field surveys. Rapid Visual Screening (RVS) was applied to document key structural parameters, which were subsequently integrated with a standardized risk index scoring approach to compute seismic vulnerability indices. Quantitative analyses were performed to classify risk levels, compare structural parameters, and evaluate consistency and sensitivity of the assessment results. The findings indicate that 68% of the assessed public buildings fall within moderate-to-high seismic risk categories, with an average vulnerability score of 0.74, while buildings older than 30 years exhibit substantially higher risk levels. These results demonstrate that the integrated RVS–risk index approach provides a stable and measurable representation of seismic vulnerability. Overall, this study contributes methodologically and empirically to seismic risk assessment practices and supports risk-informed decision-making for enhancing the resilience of public building infrastructure.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
Albulescu, A. C. (2023). Open Source Data-Based Solutions for Identifying Patterns of Urban Earthquake Systemic Vulnerability in High-Seismicity Areas. Remote Sensing, 15(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15051453
Ansari, A., Alluqmani, A. E., Huang, Z., Lee, J. H., Özden, G., Fissha, Y., Saidani, T., & Ansari, A. (2025). Fuzzy synthetic approach for seismic risk assessment of bridges with insights from the 2023 Kahramanmaras Earthquake in Turkiye. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-98277-5
Aravena Pelizari, P., Geiß, C., Aguirre, P., Santa María, H., Merino Peña, Y., & Taubenböck, H. (2021). Automated building characterization for seismic risk assessment using street-level imagery and deep learning. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 180(March), 370–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2021.07.004
Argyroudis, S. A., & Mitoulis, S. A. (2021). Vulnerability of bridges to individual and multiple hazards- floods and earthquakes. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 210, 107564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2021.107564
Asad, R., Saleem, M., Habib, M., Mufti, N., & Mayo, S. (2023). Seismic risk assessment and hotspots prioritization: a developing country perspective. Natural Hazards (Dordrecht, Netherlands), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-023-05970-7
Chen, J., Tang, H., Ge, J., & Pan, Y. (2022). Rapid Assessment of Building Damage Using Multi-Source Data: A Case Study of April 2015 Nepal Earthquake. Remote Sensing, 14(6), 1358. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14061358
Chester, M. V., El Asmar, M., Hayes, S., & Desha, C. (2021). Post-disaster infrastructure delivery for resilience. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(6), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063458
Civera, M., Aloschi, F., Di Maio, G. M., Fierro Carrasco, J. P., Miano, A., Chiaia, B., & Prota, A. (2025). Seismic resilience of urban networks: dataset for infrastructure visualization and vulnerability assessment. Scientific Data , 12(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-025-05903-y
Firmansyah, H. R., Sarli, P. W., Twinanda, A. P., Santoso, D., & Imran, I. (2024). Building typology classification using convolutional neural networks utilizing multiple ground-level image process for city-scale rapid seismic vulnerability assessment. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 131(December 2023), 107824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2023.107824
Freddi, F., Galasso, C., Cremen, G., Dall’Asta, A., Di Sarno, L., Giaralis, A., Gutiérrez-Urzúa, F., Málaga-Chuquitaype, C., Mitoulis, S. A., Petrone, C., Sextos, A., Sousa, L., Tarbali, K., Tubaldi, E., Wardman, J., & Woo, G. (2021). Innovations in earthquake risk reduction for resilience: Recent advances and challenges. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102267
Gedik, Y., Özcan, O., Özmen, M., Özcan, O., & Akay, S. S. (2025). Assessment of building damage from the 2020 Sivrice earthquake using a satellite based rapid seismic screening method. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-21320-y
Golias, E., Zapris, A. G., Kytinou, V. K., Kalogeropoulos, G. I., Chalioris, C. E., & Karayannis, C. G. (2021). Effectiveness of the novel rehabilitation method of seismically damaged rc joints using c-frp ropes and comparison with widely applied method using c-frp sheets—experimental investigation. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116454
Guo, Z., She, J., Li, Z., Du, J., & Ye, S. (2024). Integrating FRAM and BN for enhanced resilience evaluation in construction emergency response: A scaffold collapse case study. Heliyon, 10(3), e25342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25342
Harirchian, E., Kumari, V., Jadhav, K., Rasulzade, S., Lahmer, T., & Das, R. R. (2021). A synthesized study based on machine learning approaches for rapid classifying earthquake damage grades to rc buildings. Applied Sciences (Switzerland), 11(16). https://doi.org/10.3390/app11167540
Jia, J., & Ye, W. (2023). Deep Learning for Earthquake Disaster Assessment : Objects ,.
Kassem, M. M., Beddu, S., Ooi, J. H., Tan, C. G., El-Maissi, A. M., & Nazri, F. M. (2021). Assessment of seismic building vulnerability using rapid visual screening method through web-based application for Malaysia. Buildings, 11(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11100485
Kumar, A., & Ghosh, G. (2025). Assessment of soil amplification effects on the seismic vulnerability of irregular reinforced concrete buildings of varying heights. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-14145-2
Ma, M., Zhang, Y., Zhang, J., Li, M., Zhu, J., & Wang, Y. (2025). Assessment of urban seismic social vulnerability based on game theory combination and TOPSIS model: a case study of Changchun City. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-92372-3
Macchiarulo, V., Giardina, G., Milillo, P., Aktas, Y. D., & Whitworth, M. R. Z. (2025). Integrating post-event very high resolution SAR imagery and machine learning for building-level earthquake damage assessment. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 23(12), 5021–5047. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-024-01877-1
Mohtady Ali, H., Desha, C., Ranse, J., & Roiko, A. (2021). Planning and assessment approaches towards disaster resilient hospitals: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 61, 0–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102319
Qing, Y., Ming, D., Wen, Q., Weng, Q., Xu, L., Chen, Y., Zhang, Y., & Zeng, B. (2022). Operational earthquake-induced building damage assessment using CNN-based direct remote sensing change detection on superpixel level. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 112(July). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2022.102899
Rahimi, F., Sadeghi-Niaraki, A., Ghodousi, M., & Choi, S. M. (2025). Spatial-temporal modeling of urban resilience and risk to earthquakes. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-92365-2
Sammartano, G., Avena, M., Fillia, E., & Spanò, A. (2023). Integrated HBIM-GIS Models for Multi-Scale Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Historical Buildings. Remote Sensing, 15(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15030833
Shabani, A., Kioumarsi, M., & Zucconi, M. (2021). State of the art of simplified analytical methods for seismic vulnerability assessment of unreinforced masonry buildings. Engineering Structures, 239(September 2020), 112280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112280
Villar-Salinas, S., Guzmán, A., & Carrillo, J. (2021). Performance evaluation of structures with reinforced concrete columns retrofitted with steel jacketing. Journal of Building Engineering, 33(December 2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101510
Wang, Y., Cui, L., Zhang, C., Chen, W., Xu, Y., & Zhang, Q. (2022). A Two-Stage Seismic Damage Assessment Method for Small, Dense, and Imbalanced Buildings in Remote Sensing Images. Remote Sensing, 14(4), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14041012
Wei, W., Mojtahedi, M., Yazdani, M., & Kabirifar, K. (2021). The alignment of australia’s national construction code and the sendai framework for disaster risk reduction in achieving resilient buildings and communities. Buildings, 11(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11100429
Yang, J., Lu, G., Wu, Y., & Peng, F. (2025). Method for Indoor Seismic Intensity Assessment Based on Image Processing Techniques. Journal of Imaging, 11(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/jimaging11050129
Yenidogan, C. (2021). Earthquake-Resilient Design of Seismically Isolated Buildings: A Review of Technology. In Vibration (Vol. 4, Issue 3, pp. 602–647). https://doi.org/10.3390/vibration4030035
Zhang, T., Wang, D., & Lu, Y. (2023). Machine learning-enabled regional multi-hazards risk assessment considering social vulnerability. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-40159-9
Zhang, Y., Fung, J. F., Johnson, K. J., & Sattar, S. (2022). Review of Seismic Risk Mitigation Policies in Earthquake-Prone Countries: Lessons for Earthquake Resilience in the United States. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 26(12), 6208–6235. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2021.1911889