A comparison study of Catastrophe Modeling vs. Performance-Based Design

Abstract

The paper presents the methodologies at the core of catastrophe modeling (CM) and performance-based design (PBD). Both CM and PBD are probabilisitic methods, in which the probability of achieving a certain hazard intensity is calculated and coupled with an estimate of the vulnerability or fragility of a certain building exposure to get an estimate of the exposure behavior, as well as of the expected damage and losses. Probabilistic CM is a well established field applied to all sorts of hazards, including the treatment of multi-hazards, whereas application of PBD to hazards other than seismic is a more recent development in structural engineering. CM is more oriented towards computing financial losses for the insurance industry and solving emergency management or community recovery issues, while PBD is oriented at guiding a particular building owner/designer in making the right design or retrofitting decisions. This paper explores similarities and differences between CM and PBD, especially regarding how the vulnerabilities or fragilities are derived in each case, how the uncertainties are treated, and how the two methodologies could benefit from each other.