Proceedings of the International Symposium on Engineering Lessons Learned fromthe 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, March 1-4, 2012, Tokyo, JapanTOHOKU TSUNAMI-INDUCED BUILDING DAMAGE
ANALYSIS INCLUDING THE CONTRIBUTION OF
EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT DESIGN TO TSUNAMIRESILIENCE OF MULTI-STORY BUILDINGS
Gary CHOCK1, Ian ROBERTSON2, Lyle CARDEN3, and Guangren YU4
1

President, Martin & Chock, Inc., Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, and 1Chair, ASCE 7 Tsunami Loads andEffects Subcommittee, gchock@martinchock.com
2
Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Hawaii at Manoa,
Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, ianrob@hawaii.edu
3
Principal, Martin & Chock, Inc., Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, lcarden@martinchock.com
4
Structural Engineer, Martin & Chock, Inc., Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, gyu@martinchock.com

ABSTRACT: The structural details of numerous buildings in the Tohoku region were
documented by the American Society of Civil Engineers. Tsunami flow depths andvelocities were determined based on analysis of video records and the effects on simple
benchmark structures in the flow. Failure analysis of several buildings was then used toevaluate design equations for hydrodynamic loading conditions. These findings will
influence the design objectives of the forthcoming chapter on Tsunami Loads and Effects
in the ASCE 7 Standard, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures.
Key Words: Great East Japan earthquake, Tohoku Tsunami, seismic design, tsunami
loads and effects, tsunami flow velocities, failure analysis, ASCE 7
Standard, multi-story buildings, LiDAR

INTRODUCTION
The Great East Japan earthquake and Tohoku Tsunami inflicted substantial damage to many coastal
communities in Japan, including their critical port facilities, residential and commercial buildings, andinfrastructure. In April, 2011, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) sponsored a team ofengineers to survey tsunami effects on structures along the Tohoku coastline of Honshu. The teamconsisted of members of the ASCE 7 subcommittee on Tsunami Loads and Effects. The survey
objectives were to investigate structural failures and successes in order to evaluate loadings being
considered for a new chapter on Tsunami Loads and Effects in the ASCE 7 Standard, Minimum Design
Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. A subsequent survey captured detailed LiDAR data of
selected structures. The powerful 3D data provides a virtual world that enables many types of analyses,
including deformation maps of partial concrete wall blow-outs, scour depths and volumes,
displacements of damaged steel frame structures, bridge collapses, and other failures. This is valuable
information to validate numerical models and theories, enabling the quantification and understandingof tsunami forces, failure mode, and for validation of non-linear structural response analysis. This492

paper discusses the methodology used to evaluate tsunami loading provisions being considered for
adoption using these full-scale tsunami damage field observations. In addition, the contribution ofseismic maximum inelastic capacity to the successful performance of multi-story buildings subjected
to tsunami loads was further evaluated. The authors will discuss how these findings may influence theperformance objectives of the new chapter on Tsunami Loads and Effects in the ASCE 7 Standard.

TSUNAMI RECONNAISSANCES AFTER THE GREAT EAST JAPAN EARTHQUAKE
Tohoku Tsunami Reconnaissance Objectives
The reconnaissance teams had several principal objectives in the post-tsunami evaluation:
1. Collect detailed structural data for specific structures as input for case studies of loading,
2. Perform detailed, 3D laser scan of selected buildings for use in the validation of analysis, and
3. Use findings to develop improved building codes for USA regions with tsunami hazards.
ASCE/SEI Tohoku Tsunami Reconnaissance Team
There is great interest in the United States instudying the effects of the Tohoku Tsunami,
due to the analogous threat posed by the
Cascadia subduction zone to the PacificNorthwest of North America. In 1700 it isestimated that this subduction zone generated
a tsunami-genic earthquake of magnitude 9.
The Tohoku Tsunami provided substantial
information regarding tsunami impacts to
structures in a high seismic region of adeveloped country with uniform design
standards and a variety of tsunami failureloading conditions, both observed andanalytically derived. The ASCE StructuralEngineering Institute (ASCE SEI) will beincorporating tsunami design provisions in
the national load standard, ASCE 7, and theprincipal author led the ASCE Tsunami Teamto Japan a month after the Tohoku Tsunami ofMarch 11, 2011, working with members of
the Japan Society of Civil Engineers. Field
work (extent shown in Figure 1) concentrated
on identifying structures of interest, local
tsunami inundation depths, and researching
the probable flow velocities either by video
analysis or by analysis of failure mechanismsof “flow surrogate” structural elements.

Fig. 1 Extent of the ASCE SEI ReconnaissanceA full report by ASCE/SEI is in publication (Chock, Robertson, Kriebel, Francis, Nistor, 2012).
National Science Foundation 3D laser scanning
Scanning technology provides an invaluable resource to digitally preserve a scene so that engineers
and scientists can virtually visit the scene repeatedly to validate models and theories. Light Detection
and Ranging (LIDAR) 3D laser scanning is a line of sight technology that emits laser pulses at defined,493

horizontal and vertical angular increments to produce a point cloud, containing XYZ coordinates forobjects that return a portion of the light. The point cloud must be processed to remove noise, debris
and sporadic points from the dataset. Tripod mounted systems are often called terrestrial laser scanners(TLS) or ground-based LIDAR. Details of typical 3D laser scan acquisition and processing can befound in Olsen et al. (2010). The 3D laser scan survey sponsored by the National Science Foundation
was performed in June and July 2011 in the areas summarized in Table 1, scanning sites of interest
based on surveys made by the ASCE and Building Research Institute (BRI) and National Institute ofLand and Infrastructure Management (NILIM). Buildings were selected that would result in optimalcase-studies for use in modeling hydrodynamic forces in both steel frame and reinforced concrete
structures. This survey combined the 3D laser scanning with traditional structural measurements of:overall building geometry, and where accessible; concrete member sizes, reinforcing sizes and layout;
structural steel sizes and plate thicknesses; and other pertinent structural information and damage
Measurements made within an aligned 3D scan dataset can generally be obtained at sub-centimeterlevel accuracies. The 3D laser scan data, as such, allows for virtual reconnaissance efforts where theuser can make measurements without being present at the site and at points that would be inaccessible
in the real world. The measurements extracted from point clouds of the buildings can be used tovalidate the failure analyses for these structures.
Table 1 Locations surveyed with 3D laser scanning and example of Rikuzentakata sites

Site

Prefecture

Emphasis

Scans

Miyagi
Miyagi

Structural
Topography

20
30
10

Yuriage\Natori
Onagawa
Minami-Gamou(Waste- water
Treatment Plant)
Minamisanriku

Miyagi

Structural

MiyagiRikuzentakata

Iwate

Structural
Structural &Topographic

Totals5
38
103

DATA ANALYSIS
Estimation of Tsunami Flow Velocities
In order to estimate the hydrodynamic forces applied to structures during a tsunami it is necessary toestimate the flow depth and velocity that caused the observed damage. The Tohoku tsunami provided
an unprecedented opportunity to analyze tsunami flow conditions based on video and field evidence.
Much of this analysis can be performed remotely using just the captured videos and satellite imagery
tools such as Google Earth. However, field verification of dimensions provides valuable confirmationof the assumptions made during video analysis. Field investigation is also necessary to determine flow
depth which may be difficult to estimate from the video evidence alone. Video evidence of tsunami
flow characteristics is only available at certain locations depending on where helicopters or observers
were located at the time of the inundation. Because of the variability in tsunami flow characteristics
from location to location due to changes in bathymetry, topography, and physical obstructions, it is notalways possible to base flow characteristics at one location on those determined for another location. If
video evidence is not available at a location of interest, it is possible to estimate the flow
characteristics by failure analysis of a “flow surrogate” structure. Utilizing both video and “flowsurrogate” analysis, we have been able to ascertain flow velocities at numerous sites of interest. As
shown in Tables 2 and 3, the tsunami flow velocities were typically found in the range from 5 to 8 m/s.
However, there is evidence that flow velocities reached 10 m/s in areas of concentrated flow.

494

Table 2 Summary of the tsunami flow velocities determined using video analysis.
Location

Wave form

Tracking object

Natori River
Sendai Airport

River bore
Sheet flow surge
Surge
Surge
Surge
Initial sheet flow surge
Inflow at 50% inundation
Outflow between Marine
Pal Bldgs
Incoming river surge
Harbor bore
Unbroken swell
Unbroken swell

Leading edge of bore
Leading edge of flow
Leading edge of flow
Debris in flow
Debris in flow between buildings
Sheet flow over port streets
Debris in flow
Debris in flow

KamaishiKesennuma
Onagawa
Minamisanriku
Noda
Tamagawa
Kuji Port
Table 3:

Flow surrogate

Yuriage, Natori
Sendai Park
Onagawa

Concrete utility room
Flag poles
Street sign
Hillside handrail
2-story steel frame
Concrete Trellis
Large light pole
Bridge guardrail
Steel bollards

Hotel Ragaso
Rikuzentakata
Otsuchi7.43 – 8.19
5 – 8.73
9.78
13.4
12.3

Summary of flow velocities determined from flow surrogate structures

Location

Tarou

Debris in flow
Leading edge of bore
Leading edge of swell
Leading edge of swell

Est.
velocity
(m/s)
6.89
3.75
3.75
5.17
4.74 – 5.0
2.92
3.91

Est. velocity
(m/s)
7.75
3.5 – 4
>3
4
5.75
4.5
7.25
7.25 – 7.75
10Evaluation
Minimum velocity
Varies with aluminum strength
Minimum drawdown velocity
Assumed steel strength

Breach focused flow from river bankFlow Characteristics at the Takada Matsubara Building in Rikuzentakata
The utility of “flow surrogate” simple structures adjacent to a more complex building failure isillustrated by the case of a large-scale wall blowout in the Takada Matsubara building in Rikuzentakata.
Two large light standards stood on either side of the building, and a section of undamaged bridge wasalso nearby (Figure 2). The maximum inundation depth measured by fishing debris on the building
was less than the elevation of the light fixture on top of the pole. Based on structural analysis, thepushover of the light standards during the 10 meter deep inflow had the following sequence. Underflexural bending, an initial buckling of the thin pipe walls above the base plate stiffeners resulted inrotation of the pipe until the initially dry light fixture frame at the top of the pole was lowered into theflow and captured debris. This debris load at the top of the pole greatly increased the moment at thebase and initiated much more rotation until it generated tensile rupture of the anchor bolts. The bolt
anchorage group had higher moment capacity than the flexural local buckling strength of the pole. A
depth-averaged flow velocity of at least 7.25 m/s was determined from structural analysis of the polein order to create the initial buckling. In the same vicinity, the undamaged railings of a bridge wereanalyzed to provide an upper bound for the flow velocity of 7.75 m/s at this location. Thus, at thislocation we have estimates that the flow velocity to be greater than 7.25 m/s but less than 7.75 m/s.

495

Fig. 2 Flow “surrogate structures” next to the Takada Matsubara Building in Rikuzentakata
Flow Velocity derived from Concrete Wall Failures during Inflow at Yuriage Fish Market

A large morning fish market building was located directly at the wharf area at the harbor of Yuriage(Figure 3). The building consisted of a large 120 m long by 20 m wide steel-truss framed single story
high-bay building with a smaller attached one-story single bay of reinforced concrete bearing walls
and concrete roof slab. The steel-framed main building was stripped off. A reinforced concrete utility
closet for equipment had its sole door opening oriented towards the incoming tsunami, and was thus
subjected to the internal pressure resulting from stagnation of the flow. Reinforcing bar samples tested
to be equivalent to JIS G3112 SD 390 with 400 MPa average yield strength. In order for the failures
shown here to have occurred, flow velocity would have been at least 7.5 meters/second.

Fig. 3:

Wall corner joint and flexural failure by internal hydrodynamic pressurization

Flow Characteristics derived from a concrete warehouse in Onagawa
This case study was used to estimate flow velocity during the drawdown phase of the tsunami at
Onagawa. The concrete warehouse building shown in Figure 4 had three sides enclosed and became496internally pressurized by flow stagnation during tsunami drawdown. The 3D laser scan shows large
deformations of over 0.5 m in the larger wall panels, while the smaller panels had negligible lateral
deformations. Analysis based on a stagnated hydrodynamic load was able to show that the larger
panels in the exterior walls failed after flexural yielding of the panels followed by formation of acatenary membrane, then shear failure around the perimeter of the wall. The flow velocity for such a
condition was at least 5.5 m/s. Some cracking due to yielding around the perimeter of the walls wasobserved in the smaller wall segments, but the segments did not fail. The shorter vertical spans
resulted in reduced bending moments in these wall segments. It was calculated that a flow velocity ofaround 7.5 m/s would have been required to fail the smaller wall segments.

Fig. 4 Concrete warehouse wall failure due to internal pressurization in Onagawa. (a) Photograph,(b) 3D laser scan model (c) Building location

STRUCTURAL ANALYSISThe ASCE Tsunami Reconnaissance Team selected a number of representative cases for failure mode
analysis. In this section, cases studies of hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loading are further evaluated.
The loading equations discussed by Chock (2011) and Robertson (2011) were the basis for thisanalysis.
Onagawa Two-Story Cold Storage Building Buoyant Uplift
The building shown in Figure 5 was lifted by hydrostatic buoyancy off of its pile foundation, which
did not have tensile capacity. This building was approximately 22 meters by 8.7 meters by 12 meterstall. Based on extensive field measurements and a concrete density of 2400 kg/m3, the total deadweightof the structure was 8995 kN. The refrigerated space on the ground floor was effectively sealed off,
leading to a neutrally buoyant condition as soon as the water inundation depth reached 7 meters. The
building was lifted off its original site and carried over a low wall (photograph on the left), before
being deposited about 15 meters inland from its original location. It was apparently flipped over bycontact with the top of the wall that it damaged in the process. The low wall had its top edge broken
off. A large opening was chipped into the wall to access the interior of the building after the tsunami.

497

Fig. 5 The ASCE Tohoku Tsunami Reconnaissance Team at the Onagawa uplifted and overturned
2-story reinforced concrete cold-storage building
Onagawa Three-Story Steel Building Lateral Pushover
The three-story steel moment-resisting frame in Figure 6 was exposed to flow returning to the ocean
estimated from video analysis at about 8 m/s. This flow was sufficient to yield the top and bottom of
the second story columns and top of the first story columns with an estimated 67% blockage of theoriginal enclosure, either from cladding still intact or debris damming. At the first yield point of thesystem, the calculated lateral drift at the third floor would be about 30 cm. Subsequently sustained
flow induced further displacement. A subsequent LiDAR scan of the frame shows a third floor drift of
up to 50 cm. Therefore, it is proposed that once yielding of the structure had occurred, with significant
inelastic deformation, the blockage percentage reduced until loss of all cladding reduced the building’s
projected area , relieving the structure of much of the lateral pressure. Without such load shedding,collapse would have occurred.

Fig. 6 Onagawa 3-Story Steel Frame Pushover

498

Minami Gamou Wastewater Treatment Plant Bore Impact
The Minami Gamou Wastewater Treatment plant building shown in Figure 7 is a three-story reinforced
concrete building, located on the Sendai coastline south of the main port and approximately 350 metersfrom the coastline. Video of this facility in Sendai showed a tsunami bore directly striking thelongitudinal walls of buildings. The ocean facing wall of a two story high-bay on one side of the building
failed through out-of-plane flexure due to the large hydrodynamic forces.
Using inundation depth estimates by the Joint Survey Group and video footage, the resulting
pressure distribution was applied to a nonlinear finite element model (FEM) of the reinforced concretewall. A tsunami bore travelling over standing water and striking a wall is addressed by the method ofRobertson, Paczkowski, and Riggs (2011) for structural walls oriented perpendicular to the flow
direction with a width greater than 3hb or 3hj , whichever is smaller, as shown in Figure 8. The
transient lateral load per unit width of wall is given by Eq. (1).
1
4 
1Fw  k s  sw  ghb2  h j v 2j  g 3 ( h j v j ) 3 
2


(1)

This force acts at (hb+hr)/3 from the base of the wall, where hr.is given by Eq. (2)13hr  g (v j h j )

2
3

(2)

Structural drawings for the damaged buildings were obtained from the plant management. The
bore forces were found to be sufficient to create the mid-height and top and bottom flexural yielding(Figure 9). The bore impact forces were also found to exceed the surge and hydrostatic forces resulting
from the rising tsunami surge. It is concluded that repeated bore impacts were likely to be responsible
for the amount of deformation found in this wall and another building nearby.

Fig. 7 Reinforced concrete wall at the Minami Gamou Wastewater Treatment Plant Pump Station
damaged by direct strike from tsunami bore (a) exterior view, (b) LiDAR view (c) Analysis Plot.
Fig. 8 (a) Parameters for a tsunami bore travelling over standing water and striking a wall499

Rikuzentakata Tourist Center Concrete Wall Failure due to Inflow Loading
The Takada Matsubara Road Station in Rikuzentakata shown in Figure 9 endured a 10.5 meter tsunami
inundation depth with flow of about 7.5 meters/second, but suffered a failure of its principal transverse
shear wall due to unbalanced hydrostatic and hydrodynamic forces of the incoming tsunami. The wall
was at the rear face of a three-sided concrete box with the opening in the fourth side being a main
entrance into the building at the front facing the ocean. Reinforcing steel was sampled and tested at
510 MPa average yield strength, consistent with JIS G3112 SD 490.

Fig. 9 Large Wall Failure in the Takada Matsubara Building in Rikuzentakata
The probable sequence of nonlinearities ultimately leading to failure was found by stepwise nonlinear
analysis of the progression of unbalanced hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loading to be:
1. Flexural yielding of the base of the wall as soon as the flow level reached 1.6 meters.
2. Bottom half of side edge supports of the wall and the two ends of the horizontal beam yield
when the flow level reached 2.2 meters.
3. The top and upper portions of the side supports of the wall yield and concrete shear cracks
occur at the bottom when the flow reaches 2.7 meters. Shear friction of the double dowels
from the wall base foundation maintains stability of the bottom portion the wall.
4. Side supports and horizontal beam supports reach concrete shear failure cracking when theflow reaches 7.2 meters. The flexurally yielded wall essentially became a membrane.
5. The top and upper portions of the side supports reach concrete shear failure cracking when theflow reaches 9.5 meters. The top half of the wall is hanging in tension from the top beam.
6. At 10.5 meters, the upper portion of the concrete walls hanging in tension drops down andrelieves further loading increase; the unbalanced hydrostatic forces are relieved.

500

COMPARISON OF TSUNAMI FORCES WITH SEISMIC DESIGN CAPACITIESWe compare tsunami loading to the ultimate inelastic structural capacity of buildings designed tocurrent seismic codes in the USA and Japan. While they have essential common features, there aremany procedures on which the U. S. and Japanese seismic designs differ.
1. The U. S. seismic provisions are based on Maximum Considered Earthquake. The Japaneseseismic designs are based on two levels of earthquakes (i.e., moderate and severe).
2. In the U. S. seismic loads are adjusted based on Occupancy Category. For essential facilities,
seismic forces could be 50% higher than a building with standard occupancy. Japanese designs
don’t have an importance factor to adjust seismic loads based on occupancy.
3. Japanese design response spectrum (severe earthquake) is higher than the U. S. for a building
with a very short period or long period. They are similar for structures with a short period.
4. Japanese seismic design code adopts a two-phase design procedure which checks both
serviceability and ultimate limit states. The U. S. seismic design provisions do not require thatstructural members be checked for serviceability.
5. The U. S. seismic designs use R-factor to account for both the structural ductility andoverstrength of a lateral system. The R-factor ranges from 1.5 to 8.0. The Japanese seismiccode uses a constant factor equivalent to R= 4.0 for all systems.
6. The drift limits specified by the Japanese code may be more stringent than the U. S. for aductile system and vice versa for a non-ductile system.
Larger scaled and taller buildings will be inherently less susceptible to tsunamis, provided
adequate foundation anchorage for resistance to scour and uplift is present. The Japanese seismic
design code (Kuromoto, 2006) generally results in greater lateral forces and stiffer systems forreinforced concrete and steel buildings than in the USA. Seismic designs in the USA (Chock, 2010)
utilize greater reduction of the elastic design force, and this may also result in an impairment ofcapacity from earthquake damage prior to the arrival of the tsunami. Parameters for this comparison totsunami loading are as follows: 1) the prototypical building is 120ft long and 90ft wide and is 25%
open; 2) it is located in high seismic zones (for Japan, in Seismic Zone A; for U.S., Ss = 1.5 and S1 =0.6); 3) connections develop the inelastic capacities of the members; 4) tsunami flow velocity is 8m/s,
5) each tsunami inundation load curve represents the sequence of hydrodynamic loading effects asinundation increases to the maximum depth, and 6) maximum seismic inelastic capacity is utilizedwith the overstrength Ω factor.

Fig. 10 Illustration of USA Seismic performance factors based on inelastic response capacity
Figure 11 shows a comparison using a prototypical steel building of various heights. Figure 12
shows a comparison of a prototypical reinforced concrete building. We present three- and four-story
deep tsunami inundations as load histories in the depth and load domain. Mid -rise reinforced concretebuildings with shear walls appear to survive structurally without collapse. Japanese steel buildings
appear to have similar capability, but USA steel buildings would need to be strengthened at their lower
stories beyond seismic code in order to have the necessary structural integrity for tsunami resistance.

501

Fig. 11 Comparisons of seismic & tsunami actions for USA and Japanese special steel
moment-resisting frame buildings based on drift-governed member sizes

Fig. 12 Comparisons of seismic and tsunami actions for USA and Japanese concrete structural walls

CONCLUSIONS
Tsunami Lessons for the Design of Buildings and Other Structures
Structures of all material types can be subject to collapse during tsunami, but it is feasible to design
taller buildings to withstand large tsunami. Building lateral strength and local element resistance toimpact are keys to survivability. Seismic design does have a beneficial effect that increases with theheight, size, and seismic design level of the building, and expected maximum inelastic capacity can beused to find the height of archetype structures with inherent tsunami resistance. For Japanese designs,
modestly-sized buildings one story taller than the inundation may have adequate structural integrity.
For USA designs of similar height, sufficient structural integrity may not be reached for steel moment
frame systems. Foundation anchorage needs to consider overturning under buoyancy as well, andhaving sufficient openness in buildings will alleviate buoyancy. Conversely, structurally boxed-inareas will be subject to hydrodynamic over-pressurization. Loads on structures must consider debris
damming and blockage; complete breakaway cladding should not be relied upon to relieve loads.
Foundations should consider scour effects particularly at building corners.

502

Tsunami Design Performance Objectives Proposed for Tsunami Design Provisions in ASCE 7
The provisions will most likely have differing requirements based on height, seismic base shear, andthe Risk Category of Building defined in ASCE 7 per Table 4. In Figure 13, the key performancelevels are shown for two return periods, the 100-year period and a maximum considered 2500-year
event consistent with existing seismic provisions. Buildings would be designed for structural elevation
above the 100-year tsunami inundation height, similar to coastal storm flooding. The design limit forthe 2500-year event would be based on the inelastic capacity of structural behavior.
Table 4 Risk categories of buildings and other structures per ASCE 7
Risk Category I
Risk Category II
Risk Category III
Risk Category IV

Buildings and other structures that represent a low risk to humanAll buildings and other structures except those listed in Risk Categories I, III, IV
Buildings and other structures with potential to cause a substantial economic
impact and/or mass disruption of day-to-day civilian life in the event of failure.
Buildings and other structures designated as essential facilities

Fig. 13 Proposed Tsunami Design Performance Objectives
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We greatly appreciate the quick decision of the ASCE Board to fund the ASCE/SEI Tohoku Tsunami
Reconnaissance on which data this study is based. Funding for the LiDAR survey was provided by the
National Science Foundation through a NSF Rapid Grant (1138710 and 1138699).
REFERENCES
Chock, G., Robertson, I.N., Kriebel, D., Francis, M., and Nistor, I. (2012). “Tohoku Japan Tsunami ofMarch 11, 2011 – Performance of Structures.” ASCE/SEI, (in publication).
Chock, G., Robertson, I.N., Riggs, H.R. (2011). “Tsunami Structural Design Provisions for a New Update of
Building codes and Performance-Based Engineering.” Solutions to Coastal Disasters 2011, ASCE.
Chock, G. (2010). “Overview of Current USA Seismic Design Provisions for New Construction.”
China/USA Symposium for the Advancement of Earthquake Sciences and Hazard Mitigation Practices,
Beijing, China.
Kuromoto, H. (2006). “Seismic Design Codes for Buildings in Japan.” Journal of Disaster Research, Vol.1
No. 3, 341- 356.
Olsen, M.J., Kuester, F., Chang, B., and Hutchinson, T. (2010). “Terrestrial laser scanning based structural
damage assessment.” Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 24(3), p. 264-272.
Robertson I.N., Paczkowski, K., Riggs, H.R., Mohamed, A. (2011). “Tsunami Bore Forces on Walls.”
Proceedings of the ASME 2011 30th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic
Engineering, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

503