Speaker
Description
Natural disasters (including earthquakes) negatively impact the physical environment and human being in many ways. Among them, post disaster housing needs have triggered multidisciplinary approaches to better address and resolve this problem. The urgent need for shelter is very high, especially after a devastating earthquake. In seismically vulnerable areas, post-disaster housing is one of the options that could be considered for mitigation after the quakes' sorrow. Post-disaster housing with different plans, constructions, and structural features has been applied with many materials and systems in the world. Based on the duration of occupancy and stability of the structure, post-disaster housing can be categorized into four: emergency shelters, temporary shelters, temporary housing, and permanent housing. Note that temporary housing could be transformed into permanent housing units. As the place of establishment, climatic condition, duration of occupancy, and user’s expectations are effective in the type of post-disaster housing, an identical model could not be useable for all regions around the world. However, evaluation of these parameters for the definition of the effective criteria and sub-criteria for different geographical locations is possible. In this respect, the implementation of temporary houses in various regions after an earthquake seems to be a rational solution. In this paper, temporary dwellings implemented in various regions of the world have been examined and evaluated. Based on such evaluations, sub-criteria of the temporary houses following an earthquake are determined depending on plan, material, constructive establishment, construction system, and structural features. Results from this study would provide significant data for both architectural and structural designs of new post-disaster housing and for the rehabilitation of existing post-disaster housing.
Keywords | earthquake; post-disaster housing, architectural performance, structural performance |
---|---|
DOI | https://doi.org/10.5592/CO/1CroCEE.2021.181 |