PEER has just published Report No. 2020/24: "Seismic Performance of Single-Family Wood-Frame Houses: Comparing Analytical and Industry Catastrophe Models," a report for the "Quantifying the Performance of Retrofit of Cripple Walls and Sill Anchorage in Single-Family Wood-Frame Buildings" Project. It was authored by Evan Reis, Reis Consulting.
This report is one of a series of reports documenting the methods and findings of a multi-year, multi-disciplinary project coordinated by the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER and funded by the California Earthquake Authority (CEA). The overall project is titled “Quantifying the Performance of Retrofit of Cripple Walls and Sill Anchorage in Single-Family Wood-Frame Buildings,” henceforth referred to as the “PEER–CEA Project.”
The overall objective of the PEER–CEA Project is to provide scientifically based information (e.g., testing, analysis, and resulting loss models) that measure and assess the effectiveness of seismic retrofit to reduce the risk of damage and associated losses (repair costs) of wood-frame houses with cripple wall and sill anchorage deficiencies as well as retrofitted conditions that address those deficiencies. Tasks that support and inform the loss-modeling effort are: (1) collecting and summarizing existing information and results of previous research on the performance of wood-frame houses; (2) identifying construction features to characterize alternative variants of wood-frame houses; (3) characterizing earthquake hazard and ground motions at representative sites in California; (4) developing cyclic loading protocols and conducting laboratory tests of cripple wall panels, wood-frame wall subassemblies, and sill anchorages to measure and document their response (strength and stiffness) under cyclic loading; and (5) the computer modeling, simulations, and the development of loss models as informed by a workshop with claims adjustors.
This report is a product of Working Group (WG) 6: Catastrophe Modeler Comparisons and focuses on comparing damage functions developed by the PEER–CEA Project with those currently contained in modeling software developed by the three largest insurance catastrophe modelers: RMS, CoreLogic and AIR Worldwide. A semi-blind study was conducted in collaboration with the modeling companies to compare damage estimates for a selection of the Index Buildings developed in the PEER–CEA Project Study. The WG6 Project Team conducted several meetings with these modeling companies to gather feedback on the structure of and assumptions made by the PEER–CEA Project. The comparative results are evaluated and presented herein.