4.7 Article

A risk analysis procedure for urban trees subjected to wind- or rainstorm

期刊

URBAN FORESTRY & URBAN GREENING
卷 58, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126941

关键词

Risk analysis; Tree failure; Urban tree management; Wind

资金

  1. Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Firenze [2016/13533]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Urban trees are crucial for sustainable and resilient cities but also carry risks. A study presents a procedure to quantify the risk of trees falling under extreme wind events, with the combination of hazard, exposure, vulnerability and damage, characterized by Scale and Degree of Knowledge factors.
Urban trees can play a crucial role in developing sustainable, safe and resilient cities, but at the same time they can pose risks. With an engineering approach, the study deals with a procedure able to quantify the risk that a tree subjected to the action of extreme wind events, without (windstorm) or with (rainstorm) ongoing precipitation, can cause by falling on potential targets. Such a Quantitative Risk Analysis (QRA) is based on the combination of four components (hazard, exposure, vulnerability and damage) that can be modeled more or less accurately depending on the objectives of the analysis. The innovative aspect is the characterization of the analysis, by means of two factors: the Scale, to describe the spatial width over which the QRA is performed, and the Degree of Knowledge (DoK), to state the accuracy used to estimate each QRA component. Firstly, QRA components and principles behind such a distinction in DoKs are explained. Then, the proposed procedure is tested by means of a practical example, where a sensitivity analysis considering different DoKs for hazard is carried out. Despite further studies are required to improve the procedure reliability, the results are encouraging. Even considering low DoKs, the procedure is able to quantify the risk that can be used in comparative terms, especially useful when quantifying the efficacy of risk mitigating actions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据