<%BANNER%>

Hurricane Damage Mitigation: Field Deployment Strategies and Residential-Vulnerability Modeling

xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20101114_AAAAFS INGEST_TIME 2010-11-14T16:56:59Z PACKAGE UFE0021020_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 9043 DFID F20101114_AACAOA ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH rodriguez_f_Page_30.QC.jpg GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
cbe9050b74e00f62f26b40102fcd0c13
SHA-1
99721c406060a36c516a3e04c139a89ca337f48c
23356 F20101114_AACAOB rodriguez_f_Page_87.QC.jpg
17e83d2385a0b9de3323f9cf06ce7ad1
8d162a64b35119d0588c0b7ca9f7c8aa3a48f578
2840 F20101114_AACAOC rodriguez_f_Page_93.pro
80cf2146653d5a7e011c351179ff00f2
40d92a935e685b273771922a30f55079a5dcf44f
1053954 F20101114_AACAOD rodriguez_f_Page_42.tif
9f5977e46bc166f6b380fa9a2266a2c2
9d3ba1c233bea3c6151181bf8792023918c8676e
55158 F20101114_AACAOE rodriguez_f_Page_74.pro
1ed52fa6f1c0f1177682d07f91b49eed
89579a6533ef0ae69b4e043533284cc9868872b7
51738 F20101114_AACAOF rodriguez_f_Page_62.pro
59071388957ac4f384f62157b8267695
ac9fddfecfae3c177cc972b25302072f71f1a5c3
25271604 F20101114_AACAOG rodriguez_f_Page_06.tif
75b090af05505d6095370c8b61f383d6
f3f3d176410be372667abbadf168ef12fef7fe8a
13985 F20101114_AACAOH rodriguez_f_Page_25.QC.jpg
35090cac0ddc7c1fb98d1c5e3f850136
8b20d253ec2828bff81012073450296db3707801
111426 F20101114_AACAOI rodriguez_f_Page_42.jp2
a99df9c15078412404ad74a97e30ab62
e240f7353d090f07e06a9f1e5e56bae8ddaac9a3
73757 F20101114_AACAOJ rodriguez_f_Page_21.jpg
6c78fdc977e9257f2b35323ebe267081
af1f58cb928cf08bd689868365d5b8978a2ed4d6
7240 F20101114_AACAOK rodriguez_f_Page_15thm.jpg
574f1fb83591507f038380ca5c9df67a
1cfcadd7f875039f6896c0a5e8a168261a740de0
1894 F20101114_AACAOL rodriguez_f_Page_37.txt
c7560b280753cef700231a5150c9cfe1
75776881a4ba6b5fea8686ac24ec038de06255cc
5040 F20101114_AACANW rodriguez_f_Page_06thm.jpg
5e881fae5cf164c29ac6c890e8d171a7
ac1af821067667e1ac000f744a3a4f04e8414823
1893 F20101114_AACAPA rodriguez_f_Page_19.txt
7699f987e94197b43abe16e27d872e7d
29bfb08596bce5856774bf840ed335bd65466b89
6730 F20101114_AACAOM rodriguez_f_Page_47thm.jpg
0a52e7d600399f5a7439a293ca741e17
bc634d3d1d95ee863f6c5ec285d874d91558ecfd
68614 F20101114_AACANX rodriguez_f_Page_37.jpg
48fab9697afb86a8ce288040c559d83a
69dfc1e2c77f581551e1b82c3d01d6246d38b210
115754 F20101114_AACAPB rodriguez_f_Page_73.jp2
925df1bc6cd432b32a7f081e549d44ce
1360cf5de5db125d2ef76d3fe4259a408aaed128
23474 F20101114_AACAON rodriguez_f_Page_75.QC.jpg
18913667fe66b324d404231ccb143f3c
377b258743a13c6d149575e9af92d7a35b5762d7
48875 F20101114_AACANY rodriguez_f_Page_72.pro
dbbc72a565867a9ae0f1caa0e7e7d737
fccf5beb44c7bd11143999ee2e46a8150beb715d
72470 F20101114_AACAPC rodriguez_f_Page_32.jpg
1da870e394a84ac05e943912e3597cfa
5a3865f01eee975da584060c8d495022e4539f8a
6835 F20101114_AACAOO rodriguez_f_Page_44thm.jpg
73ab96535f971ef3e9b5f192bbbb0c8e
a9410aba95cf9b7d1ac887e91d80859a48c9c40f
45756 F20101114_AACANZ rodriguez_f_Page_66.pro
2289c517ea31eb9c8a856adb2102b68c
d90a4c6d3463e971e9ed857c76421c7084346b88
78694 F20101114_AACAPD rodriguez_f_Page_15.jpg
6ce06d4f032f1b888ff35e77e280d44e
48287164fc4564e7a1ad69e40795745082c5a467
1687 F20101114_AACAOP rodriguez_f_Page_10.txt
224130ad38ccc7af713bd7cc9bc4594b
1dc600b83497d53809e12415842e0fd9752d5127
2057 F20101114_AACAPE rodriguez_f_Page_62.txt
22ed36e335ea07c860287a91d05007d3
ab53cb08762831647b1489b20ee506c3f526b9d8
24224 F20101114_AACAOQ rodriguez_f_Page_23.QC.jpg
c6278687f1feff40584aa9b94d52d2e9
8fa0b52a9853f37b1b3a5c3796d6c95a186e45a9
24752 F20101114_AACAPF rodriguez_f_Page_68.QC.jpg
8de7e48fa6d6c2f0284dadf4dd38c30a
af552a98eea59ccaad2e4ea318af65471036605f
108467 F20101114_AACAOR rodriguez_f_Page_75.jp2
481fc8f3b91a18586b0dc694fd76bf13
8481c1a6c946c55c532791314301ad863ef47e08
6720 F20101114_AACAPG rodriguez_f_Page_57thm.jpg
91f70c7019ebbafcc7065502f66d241c
1ab76078e4d8c17711b4490992dc15568de99120
66809 F20101114_AACAOS rodriguez_f_Page_12.jp2
7853035f457e590736056c01c1766cc8
1da6c64ca514a10803c37af3089ed7be924722b6
6465 F20101114_AACAPH rodriguez_f_Page_38thm.jpg
6c3bdf23ddd188f1aaa62d91eee0ee56
547bd45dec8c8e66ce170007415822bba8759eb0
2180 F20101114_AACAOT rodriguez_f_Page_15.txt
2debb0774e2bb343cbe07f2723e96eb4
411ab74882783ff62be0be241978a64856e87448
19501 F20101114_AACAPI rodriguez_f_Page_78.pro
6bc602b3c2c1fd616613b0fcda0e6274
81c050598518a5f8e4aca94326f986b9f08aafdb
49537 F20101114_AACAOU rodriguez_f_Page_31.pro
1867a9eea98e5e5b1d12b2b121d64258
e8ca66ed5e39cd20420a57d976ec6f22b91afbbf
6584 F20101114_AACAPJ rodriguez_f_Page_31thm.jpg
fe7ff7f7b0f975c01065a6384297147e
dcf357a830d496546ab705d16ee8dfc1bd19d2a6
1051975 F20101114_AACAOV rodriguez_f_Page_29.jp2
7e4025e6ca7c9825195ee67f835da75d
b743114ac12ae9cbffe94f1c51a19f756a7f7d7a
38684 F20101114_AACAPK rodriguez_f_Page_09.jpg
f6fc89e7a69a719064cc734d61ca8017
9284db9dd4c73a3f0fd7929b5e9b000b1d9b182c
7093 F20101114_AACAOW rodriguez_f_Page_34thm.jpg
caf34cfaa7b9db1c6208460b096db17b
32f62882e10af188f1dcbb9dd2a3aced2176ef01
6629 F20101114_AACAPL rodriguez_f_Page_58thm.jpg
9b31267380ad406747bae30f017f6530
45b3313538d2794fc1e83d97fa5445a5eb96c616
1051976 F20101114_AACAPM rodriguez_f_Page_51.jp2
6761e6fe190f3b17894c7339e8ae2126
dbb05eb71050da60af626d9a9c27eb84a7574d2d
1051959 F20101114_AACAOX rodriguez_f_Page_28.jp2
96b7ddd7357ba45f013f67abb9cdad19
7cb834afaa2ecd2c6b6cf4c6b32f64124025afe4
6455 F20101114_AACAQA rodriguez_f_Page_30.pro
c60aa530d9a7db0abc742465d8ece7d7
92605cb3989374802bd710e196bd7577054a0e07
1049 F20101114_AACAPN rodriguez_f_Page_25.txt
b7ce6727b76760fdb7ba4b4fd05b4a22
634e2a5e18cdc53361f562d66033af80db0c5de9
4572 F20101114_AACAOY rodriguez_f_Page_80thm.jpg
7b2ad7ecc0543015c0278f4e451a3313
2e0f0f0695400730905ee5adb29599a96302958a
75615 F20101114_AACAQB rodriguez_f_Page_76.jpg
eaabd896cc01682919516d91894251b8
0c7bc3d1b7eb6b03eee66ed2ae9e9337c669d5de
25526 F20101114_AACAPO rodriguez_f_Page_15.QC.jpg
d1bd937873983ff0015c495f30b5ca15
530e075702e874bbc377c24523699ccdd26cef7c
108647 F20101114_AACAOZ rodriguez_f_Page_14.jp2
706c7747bf96a952539e020a99a208cd
13f919b7dcb370b29205d56772de363dccfbfdef
778 F20101114_AACAQC rodriguez_f_Page_78.txt
0bcea041f7244713a93602bf21f22e9b
e1555b030fc29e150decb7aaa2db82455b6fac75
2144 F20101114_AACAPP rodriguez_f_Page_34.txt
ef341ebfcb2a3b00b6d653d11f130dd2
05c22efd08cb6bcf868be3c45f16551181eba50f
1051936 F20101114_AACAQD rodriguez_f_Page_93.jp2
8537101b8a3a98a73258169b5f17140d
25bafccab6364fee25e91a19833ba86984f54edc
26229 F20101114_AACAPQ rodriguez_f_Page_83.pro
df6750d868360049b759e36f0e165a80
6cf3833000492b3ea3d608f1d21a29ce5d8934f9
23181 F20101114_AACAQE rodriguez_f_Page_72.QC.jpg
a98eba461f269dbb425086f04d6fc5d9
7971ac4c5648e7916ad46b7260b4cc9cdaacfd9f
85472 F20101114_AACAPR rodriguez_f_Page_28.jpg
7814caff9387ac53ee3b54c6ed3ff0af
b20d8c22b302ed5f0d0baddb30efad7caaaa41c4
3342783 F20101114_AACAQF rodriguez_f.pdf
005c55f136838c279250c552220da7f5
d450bc0429dca900b68d9e803a9efe0131bd4efb
F20101114_AACAPS rodriguez_f_Page_57.tif
e7a7098973f3256332635d361c83f5b8
9237559b19065a57170305bfb352557263e8fb80
F20101114_AACAQG rodriguez_f_Page_25.tif
79651095680961135d6840d7eab051c5
1450aed4be633ebd2122b6197576a7be270f84fa
44571 F20101114_AACAPT rodriguez_f_Page_88.pro
6c5454450266dc9f05d9326a931fdcb4
bd5ffe841680550e50ab73a99773d26f500db366
488 F20101114_AACAQH rodriguez_f_Page_56.txt
01f60d2e606e756fceefe5cb1e25c7e7
af97cc2e292ca0e40be035afc51488f0b8035864
3290 F20101114_AACAPU rodriguez_f_Page_28.pro
9e9d1698a232b747dd9063123c67e8b8
2afc6ea189cdfb9bc6fad5703ab2c395fd32ef1a
F20101114_AACAQI rodriguez_f_Page_89.tif
506e36433b7b3ead1059819b9a8b4bab
1e37f68ae7e2069f43a2931f58ea3fcf885c34e6
F20101114_AACAPV rodriguez_f_Page_72.tif
8fe2b21c50d2de10c0b6aff1f3d491bf
0dce0f081f78b1d61352900cb09c4db6b47ce9fb
154 F20101114_AACAQJ rodriguez_f_Page_79.txt
9c126522601dec7eeb1700b1ddce8d79
c0a42b9c60718c7bd09b318c82f82034337aee32
545006 F20101114_AACAPW rodriguez_f_Page_56.jp2
e12e3306e4f182c64c359147f8d54621
348daa58519fbf9d8342e4c4672096bdbf0f6798
73866 F20101114_AACAQK rodriguez_f_Page_69.jpg
90c4f08bd761243c9dc3df1b01fbb9ab
6e5553fa078c2066b24b0dc5bae2bf3f0fdd7945
24666 F20101114_AACAPX rodriguez_f_Page_21.QC.jpg
60f1ec0a781a855c799033024669fa39
bed7ddbe4751e4296e87b592b8fd11f0077d07ad
2079 F20101114_AACAQL rodriguez_f_Page_65.txt
c1857b12e5d91b28ab21d40183a4203b
61d955616fcf5372522cf11d4627b57276d24163
F20101114_AACARA rodriguez_f_Page_80.tif
0666df5296aaa309bc6606415894e63d
4d396c63bd385142ddea10795186d4191239aa15
6865 F20101114_AACAQM rodriguez_f_Page_33thm.jpg
5f44ef54373e785b21e60c2723d4290d
912de0e628e3257d2d5c81d233b89dddf051cef0
114937 F20101114_AACAPY rodriguez_f_Page_40.jp2
b76b4a61ce178e3e24c0cda0bb141f3c
dba29b953c103b1fd46096cf8ef209165e39bb5a
115710 F20101114_AACARB rodriguez_f_Page_67.jp2
f650b67496fcbd0de4149aa1c5bb2767
b02cef2adcdb2b8fe726da6a023d2622d5275b7a
3854 F20101114_AACAQN rodriguez_f_Page_89thm.jpg
cd7b0e3b44a7dc9fc185ba95d44b6cbc
c72eb1ce3b62435103da707953a3f50f5c5c3bf1
479 F20101114_AACAPZ rodriguez_f_Page_94.txt
c9dc9f9e8f097d0cb2dc146d47cdf4dd
03b23cca746b1cd120a625b58541e03a26ee919d
3659 F20101114_AACARC rodriguez_f_Page_97thm.jpg
3b109920a900bf7579716775b25a6e3a
d995f8518c8591d968cc8f92d668e4bd45ff47b5
49361 F20101114_AACAQO rodriguez_f_Page_98.jpg
b00bae68ab1bbe50cbbe8f7d890fe203
bdfd01877466c163044c30cc508135d83af8e9ef
6628 F20101114_AACARD rodriguez_f_Page_27thm.jpg
f7a1b188e9edcfbaa987245bc212a448
8668bbf239a1e359c8ad9054d8e307d7ddb7241a
F20101114_AACAQP rodriguez_f_Page_70.tif
8fbdf650780c3ce2d1b105c8f681d27c
a23f58e88153fa29113a285843cf43e72027df79
12048 F20101114_AACARE rodriguez_f_Page_53.pro
629c4a1994aeb044abe75c9e7961cfd3
f378d9e0c9e245204385eaefcc6f01db434af930
75941 F20101114_AACAQQ rodriguez_f_Page_46.jpg
8fe6947f219d7cc4b305c4ff9a0fbb9a
09b578fad0c684d686104048d7ccce610f62eecb
109883 F20101114_AACARF rodriguez_f_Page_20.jp2
8cf1278e2a179da8fd0b09584a557411
e31c4a1fcd029d24c796a54933294048ca822b98
113305 F20101114_AACAQR rodriguez_f_Page_41.jp2
10ab7dc8a8a17a3ce2fa35d3c3e2144b
aa2d7d4f4dd6d46f0598077d54c9db597e2613e5
F20101114_AACARG rodriguez_f_Page_10.tif
c38084ea1a9d40c448f64f1bd74e93a9
db756f2e67bd3db031d9eee991de78beff1df9e3
1767 F20101114_AACAQS rodriguez_f_Page_95.pro
307f4f9d153bb0a3a5933ee441dfc2e7
3cf49768430e3ef3330c0c292c064c39fd493cf5
6630 F20101114_AACARH rodriguez_f_Page_24thm.jpg
27ae652b768c74d70a68760b79c9c349
430cf3720c6c32ca26f7cd5bee2799ba0a4a8291
51700 F20101114_AACAQT rodriguez_f_Page_42.pro
756431d9eea72ea48b89421c34c19ff0
5d583590686b436c81cff060ed8cd932b4e99d72
54701 F20101114_AACARI rodriguez_f_Page_73.pro
9dde0274d84ef62c23c8684f9639de7d
38aed0e1471862eab8b9a23c9e1de84a8b38eb6d
9314 F20101114_AACAQU rodriguez_f_Page_80.pro
0d2bb377be810227403aefc14e7a820a
e22d217fe7fea9c733ff6d7b5168530e13c3d9b3
53029 F20101114_AACARJ rodriguez_f_Page_17.pro
2f3afda1151846143909f62de9ca7e17
d54b7d04af741672a315bf83fdfed52b64f10f83
115473 F20101114_AACAQV rodriguez_f_Page_68.jp2
833e477f56e175eee5b04206a33094d0
d55b772e30c127e17283e97f3dd81c0a24e20f31
3532 F20101114_AACARK rodriguez_f_Page_09thm.jpg
f33ddb93e4ab330aa5880707c0e6cf1d
0e44ba4f1e795e7b1a84e16fef848ec386f15c42
76453 F20101114_AACAQW rodriguez_f_Page_64.jpg
53066c06ea68e58a705be86c0d6a1ccc
84c737aa703953e0f3f4186989a1549d19a65b2d
62631 F20101114_AACARL rodriguez_f_Page_49.jpg
3f9c1c0b9e2d1a032377c20bdb5c30e1
66521d36f1bbe270ec7f195ecb5c4309cc9bcaf8
72155 F20101114_AACAQX rodriguez_f_Page_59.jpg
a9ac2ce50e6456d620c2e2ad9cd46411
eae1b54e85c2847cc3f69289c1bcffccd8b94fc9
78038 F20101114_AACASA rodriguez_f_Page_05.jpg
c72e762abde3457e4d61bb8ca275f971
8be1585b8ea91133ad61f82a0bedd801500efb81
2010 F20101114_AACARM rodriguez_f_Page_45.txt
c1cd3080b588108af7a8f1631cf65cfc
22de3690314d7846ce9e81a106ccebf48a913201
1670 F20101114_AACAQY rodriguez_f_Page_49.txt
fb884ac6b1e0f2d8f2ecd13289ea8955
5cdfe90dc4d593284079f7af5f361a37737edc05
32608 F20101114_AACASB rodriguez_f_Page_55.jpg
fd557642e0966d004e9f4dd59e8a64b0
6f469f4a4820b8f2161dcc4ff368e4f94c319f10
112780 F20101114_AACARN rodriguez_f_Page_57.jp2
820e875e5071496c7bab4e54b35c734b
5bfe0b0fdd33c6612f8b32e12b8912774c9ef833
52837 F20101114_AACASC rodriguez_f_Page_18.pro
d4d028c8340d76b17247f0fe5ec83eb3
e41b7114294bd3a7089d9064dcc6a00ed8ca95d5
F20101114_AACARO rodriguez_f_Page_36.tif
d8b31cf3ac0c05a11e7a0c7128d73fc1
147beeda8a565dd8197ceee67572347d3a704ef0
10766 F20101114_AACAQZ rodriguez_f_Page_53.QC.jpg
7477d70ef97328cfcc793d28ca211c09
c18e6053e7a0da10a58152b3bfaef1207cea1111
42031 F20101114_AACASD rodriguez_f_Page_83.jpg
5be9c9fed0f1c4fecdd1daf53c6a6c45
87f8cb1f612deae8c5864d422ac3638ad4af522b
F20101114_AACARP rodriguez_f_Page_27.tif
951e9d8bab9a34ec4ecf9a20aceed007
9946c17fe92be29235bc2971bbb8482194588d4a
75334 F20101114_AACASE rodriguez_f_Page_58.jpg
aa705be81b2004b9f911e4dfba3841fe
b7d9e7caeaa2f6e00f5a57dcafd5d076157ac2d7
F20101114_AACARQ rodriguez_f_Page_41.tif
674a2599f600bef9aacce0f12686f8b4
ad2a2e76fd7bf1fab71be2ce6e9bd9be5f5b7598
841 F20101114_AACASF rodriguez_f_Page_89.txt
4c4e754dd2f5f2ade85fac1b102c33ef
79d48c8c185751136ca502c5b1a188ad84d567ac
44538 F20101114_AACARR rodriguez_f_Page_97.jpg
0319160892ddc377e286e115c017b38d
e9b54c8d934db9f9f3dbb42e20c1cc12aeafa069
29898 F20101114_AACASG rodriguez_f_Page_12.pro
ed8e39af4a7fbae26d40bb6780f19feb
9ef6c9453e5187e8a42a4e3ef5b81a330adb1eb3
F20101114_AACARS rodriguez_f_Page_97.tif
e6850d0982b516c653373647f1e8513b
80e2aa22eebd6eba5464bc2b40140ac874b5acfe
2023 F20101114_AACASH rodriguez_f_Page_32.txt
7860a46e5f1f6389cbb5831ca25b6f4e
fc6319aec8f53e5bf76570a9089ca13932a80e3d
2077 F20101114_AACART rodriguez_f_Page_39.txt
bc2d6daf1e1499f2f8f9c6cd4b672c48
fa7ff9cac4028e73d5fa0e1e9b12dcab3de0db55
1193 F20101114_AACASI rodriguez_f_Page_12.txt
007b64723efaae72af2feb49606201eb
c91dc02a40a1ff1eeee6f6fe7881a35ac15955db
19683 F20101114_AACARU rodriguez_f_Page_06.QC.jpg
817eb1a0b93e7ec3ac905d6118df79cd
a8ce015917b4d68727a83399fddb99b60d7bca75
F20101114_AACASJ rodriguez_f_Page_46.tif
2e0285748649911e67d31561cc22c750
0eb27fa461538222f45c6959e4f2b66bc6120e68
50850 F20101114_AACARV rodriguez_f_Page_45.pro
e6b7eb14136ef05357a07d13b58558b2
484ade59f86db54fb0ac156cb959a7e426216ef2
25674 F20101114_AACASK rodriguez_f_Page_82.QC.jpg
17e951b186b198a927006f725674aead
d366b4066aaa3373a32955b88972621f5267ecc6
52647 F20101114_AACARW rodriguez_f_Page_65.pro
213187955439c0df7d82065136837bd1
51b43ad4ee59c150a0782b5330b9869624887184
75520 F20101114_AACASL rodriguez_f_Page_17.jpg
153523b3667a686de445048cd992dd6b
7bb93047be1f1a6a6153cbd4ce2c90f88631bc6f
24657 F20101114_AACARX rodriguez_f_Page_57.QC.jpg
0b167d85783dd703c801cb617cfcd609
31d648725ccf2ebe4a78334b6ea17e0f78000be5
72501 F20101114_AACARY rodriguez_f_Page_63.jpg
05c5926594b453cc4919f03726b95160
d25d7d42ca279044f9b80fa3fd38ee0a8b62c148
2024 F20101114_AACATA rodriguez_f_Page_13.txt
ad0329275e79a9b211a3c69beefb7cc5
e25f949dad211cd9c2fbe4e73208377f21b62d98
54504 F20101114_AACASM rodriguez_f_Page_47.pro
69dee676ffb28b544cde978f7ec74755
d992b09550758412cc6ec841a35f6f499dfbe652
1045 F20101114_AACARZ rodriguez_f_Page_83.txt
205406341d186125e86cdcbdbd272dc7
dead6a79d38efa92c1944428382addef6afea88c
4354 F20101114_AACATB rodriguez_f_Page_12thm.jpg
65ef00676991f9b71a2da02c3ab7c5d0
088ed024d4f657320291a96ffff7a8bbf004d112
22678 F20101114_AACASN rodriguez_f_Page_19.QC.jpg
55148699ef9ea946ad419ad92c23bb7a
bf61423600696a9d38a11d7db365bf21327e7390
24778 F20101114_AACATC rodriguez_f_Page_40.QC.jpg
7e265b959226003b93d9022d1564e880
7b876c1da5162b8f178d90a0cba74622a55ac590
F20101114_AACASO rodriguez_f_Page_88.tif
1b746b83c90815e49e9871e1e75d6743
bb07f97d5987de8db58bc4175e70269e595ac64b
F20101114_AACATD rodriguez_f_Page_84.tif
acff8d2c895c98a2aca552799baa8ce4
cb904f7c101243d42cdaa4401e63078a61b4b5a0
6757 F20101114_AACASP rodriguez_f_Page_68thm.jpg
4b49287c9cf93a6081d8820235cbb296
c884a08c0d1b53e2b8a54a30ba193e216ca434cf
6351 F20101114_AACATE rodriguez_f_Page_91.pro
e7f6ca86465b80ddcfd59c40948dd66c
1edd17f21385ed86ac117cc0988846c04a174c7f
1051974 F20101114_AACASQ rodriguez_f_Page_05.jp2
2ffd25362b35d87583bf1f6c16906b64
fcc0916bff60fae228a636ab514f28d8dcb90618
10944 F20101114_AACATF rodriguez_f_Page_54.QC.jpg
517dcd906c284d8963123b8c04d056b0
29465dc743b827659dbdbae63ba5e20f22f48956
2131 F20101114_AACASR rodriguez_f_Page_64.txt
6a35860bf3b46ac56cfcfdb33f15e0f3
a69cff55915b9e4ad183df2d40c87bd094129146
8549 F20101114_AACATG rodriguez_f_Page_54.pro
6e7ed6af15e834881e510f03a7673fcb
447f0f54a995c2f8c41fc8cab87df2a7cdb91bf3
F20101114_AACASS rodriguez_f_Page_03.tif
7a727c93d4ee1e9fa6dfb78a4357967b
1d172b20b1b0af9445131cb855b7506d751e8fa7
101375 F20101114_AACATH rodriguez_f_Page_66.jp2
250543053efb85d6c91978197aaa5797
682ca9c089d4a3e286f76d9e91ce07c969f345a3
F20101114_AACAST rodriguez_f_Page_51.tif
2944a2a5d5e595b4db421583a58251a4
ff726c46f1ee9a779574a952ea0d0c825611876d
6494 F20101114_AACATI rodriguez_f_Page_75thm.jpg
e1a4ff2b52595bc8313629e37b8a3bef
a97216b35663ca4c19548f72f8a6b1f3c4f89641
637 F20101114_AACASU rodriguez_f_Page_54.txt
f123d6d230924b8eb031cbe77f7b55b6
5268de2d08ac86c1b19031e12a94e9fb795f6633
3431 F20101114_AACATJ rodriguez_f_Page_55thm.jpg
3a557c6a247a71797b849f0f33ad288e
d2578064d7373ed197221a2c7e6097853437a043
6337 F20101114_AACASV rodriguez_f_Page_84thm.jpg
ff9b8b9658cf9d1fa12c800efca890c6
435598c2be62e4984d13bc66fd20de689a170082
26008 F20101114_AACATK rodriguez_f_Page_25.pro
c24a2048b51e1a453e117f1ee8ca6b9c
39f4f09f91af88fa3a0d0e328272812daae0b29d
15317 F20101114_AACASW rodriguez_f_Page_07.jpg
80e6349f2f6ce75a2d35aebdbf1d2eb8
3f4ff90322db506bbac2bdd6b7face8afbce674e
110668 F20101114_AACATL rodriguez_f_Page_86.jp2
23c3093250fce4e7ee3325a864a935a8
36c538ec92dd8bc40e43ae5cb046eafe8b1eea5d
107012 F20101114_AACASX rodriguez_f_Page_45.jp2
c38cb4ffb826bca914625145d1c9f800
4e6ff070e8944ca322631f2aa83e73578d7d3544
24855 F20101114_AACAUA rodriguez_f_Page_47.QC.jpg
106b15aedd8b095b12f0421c5c8f91e0
42beeccd1c22409fda74f13bd6370f688d7ee106
2155 F20101114_AACATM rodriguez_f_Page_57.txt
378de11e5ac81fc2e0cd86a14940007c
73f83875e581b4c52dab45ee86d0fdf7f0799996
73687 F20101114_AACASY rodriguez_f_Page_20.jpg
64583b615731696f447fd3834af586f2
4e936e72147b11bd7680811a88a51afeac55c0bb
2201 F20101114_AACAUB rodriguez_f_Page_16.txt
9eb9f62e937885ac4ad19ad8c2a8772e
ad52e50a01df56d630d62655860daf84b4f39b54
22880 F20101114_AACATN rodriguez_f_Page_66.QC.jpg
d788ecc0076e30e61b8eab70381c9822
76df00bc6ca8273281808c4b9c4f9219821f0c35
985599 F20101114_AACASZ rodriguez_f_Page_09.jp2
06ed3973edf07f7214fdc5e6cbba3e69
4aad183f4e816a8bec110513ebbe2554744a8d4f
6717 F20101114_AACAUC rodriguez_f_Page_42thm.jpg
270bedde99db87582186c5d5016ef37f
8f5c3a2b7657024ac679f2b1981652998d90989d
6523 F20101114_AACATO rodriguez_f_Page_39thm.jpg
1934bb39b2fdf6006ab59d4356e8337a
82884174420d2c31eafa8f4090ed4a3609c95da3
202479 F20101114_AACAUD rodriguez_f_Page_07.jp2
be3265c50391e7d2355e71a54a954a18
26a2f5dc02d8bdbcd0421d92840dc04ba4fd392c
70489 F20101114_AACATP rodriguez_f_Page_23.jpg
c298aa00111bbc42b9d08e239029d404
9e6ebedf85c52ac415235670d0e946db75011e96
F20101114_AACAUE rodriguez_f_Page_50.tif
9f5b5de123827afa4f4393bd41a69231
43e1f57c23845769994020f8775d20d4eea83d00
49711 F20101114_AACATQ rodriguez_f_Page_63.pro
6740f8c5653ba06fd62c695016ee9d45
a33753c5fc071cd0d52bb398b06e5b2fb1d32f9b
8684 F20101114_AACAUF rodriguez_f_Page_79.QC.jpg
12051c5c0f0eabf9ccf6515f49521bdc
d22312ad95e98164f9cb6ccf083283acfb1472a2
F20101114_AACATR rodriguez_f_Page_54.tif
aaa20e95a2a463f88cd8ec23ba962dd6
873fecbe42305b06c64e9e264d36e4ebbd86905d
158 F20101114_AACBAA rodriguez_f_Page_90.txt
3546e931e32bd25898f319cd68760598
32b9a8a1bfaa6b71c1e6d7681e3a87ed5cdf6607
55970 F20101114_AACAUG rodriguez_f_Page_08.pro
02baa4627f9e897b6a56a6e5e8474183
304866851ef4caf414420151f9bd45229e852e95
6241 F20101114_AACATS rodriguez_f_Page_81thm.jpg
9bd51b81e2b6c712b910e2816bdac298
c711252e78c50b4b0a5e4fce94a69e58f017f295
6305 F20101114_AACBAB rodriguez_f_Page_48thm.jpg
a9ade791d18ab408b928cd3f05cb1f0d
02cfb149dd6b8d37993ba36fa4530eaa1d24eefc
1946 F20101114_AACAUH rodriguez_f_Page_81.txt
5e0b999aa29040bcbb1a9e9ee36a53d7
b686ac1e0f9a88d283e0f80a72cacc291cb49965
7214 F20101114_AACATT rodriguez_f_Page_01.QC.jpg
aa10e4b77e2d5bc822df2bd83e998e89
9b6d136eb67bbf4ae751243e07eec507580cf8fa
2461 F20101114_AACBAC rodriguez_f_Page_90.pro
34e705189ebf0aa1577986e0af2a96d1
a4b1dea9ee2509e635215af91b35f471404ce7bc
2040 F20101114_AACAUI rodriguez_f_Page_42.txt
e4a2021122b33717f2229dd3eec954f5
98645d57ef01c44f65a71c396c96a7a054b42fde
111250 F20101114_AACATU rodriguez_f_Page_69.jp2
eb81473e0daec0c9637f8426e0c66c8f
4e151457c84c0fb15034cef5fcbfd7b0f0ca846a
2680 F20101114_AACBAD rodriguez_f_Page_96.txt
64a1f8e228e40e3519901cd341cc495f
218769631ce4636445dca5684f96a75f16ece748
2154 F20101114_AACAUJ rodriguez_f_Page_73.txt
655cfc1dacabd076979420b346beb966
c89a163fbf6a1740d377f7c4fae72512bce26d78
2165 F20101114_AACATV rodriguez_f_Page_46.txt
724d105f45c376125d9bbb6ee58a4af3
eb0a37bb90283c8c84d5aa384e78565691898c15
5960 F20101114_AACBAE rodriguez_f_Page_94thm.jpg
d53ee7e489cdd1d06c0bb77a6d21658e
7ce67e4e7a150edece1420bcfa870b2fb0acf6a9
78116 F20101114_AACAUK rodriguez_f_Page_67.jpg
a504244a5c68bb198a885421da9df5b1
bdf027c2ece2fd4aee53cc23d794383557b25068
15883 F20101114_AACATW rodriguez_f_Page_04.jp2
8200bc2ee77296a71299621abb630521
b116c46c419ee2056b2d98362c000b24e0c6ca45
F20101114_AACBAF rodriguez_f_Page_28.tif
e81000cfb3b9c493336b7bbc968a431f
4fd09afc7ad322fadecbfaba2b81d00f264ceaa7
22189 F20101114_AACAUL rodriguez_f_Page_97.pro
b93f888e3e4d3ec028a80b234baa1541
bb78800b49b77a80e295b1177b2b1b1e29479dd7
22474 F20101114_AACATX rodriguez_f_Page_50.pro
9e6463e7efc6390542e902a1a7e675bb
af2f37d387004be76296f931e765d91b9fbbabca
113412 F20101114_AACBAG rodriguez_f_Page_35.jp2
a28308d5d3ef456534a7b570c520ce3e
c6528f63d42b76ce1af2c8566f4fb547e8a52a77
25097 F20101114_AACAUM rodriguez_f_Page_67.QC.jpg
31f81efdd4c10c1011305d580a02c425
e6f68ff6ef468adf1ccadf5c01e28807dcaa36ad
76688 F20101114_AACATY rodriguez_f_Page_68.jpg
7fea2b7a849eadcc6f2525464bbe8c46
3086fe3a76c7110ebb85cc1cc3f3e9ed1e422116
6467 F20101114_AACBAH rodriguez_f_Page_45thm.jpg
39157d0a37e2c7b7ee0c6c2c314bc59b
00452725f83e76f51fa1b9f95cc6b60701c443ab
F20101114_AACAVA rodriguez_f_Page_64.tif
1efcb9c5cdda3f55964ff2e75f9c7500
bfdea86656e5c52e81d5f89f4b0eaca4c7f5dfbe
46068 F20101114_AACAUN rodriguez_f_Page_12.jpg
91ff10080b7d6a6dfa246e28835f418b
62039c94b1f6629ce6a6ed4c0aee31862ec66d21
67840 F20101114_AACATZ rodriguez_f_Page_66.jpg
c0bd81e6cdc0c9686a763b7c0ddac55a
9e662037e4ee17cb189caa2c346305ece04837e7
52806 F20101114_AACAVB rodriguez_f_Page_41.pro
76c36155beec10e7d6e2fd0de9112ff2
88c81ec16087f8cf975ed49c999b09aa33e50361
F20101114_AACAUO rodriguez_f_Page_96.tif
b6fa616f6c244f1b4a032c97543e2b07
f207d6730ea0b9e220732e76e54d858f200f07e6
118724 F20101114_AACBAI rodriguez_f_Page_74.jp2
88d3f62e17514318763ccc394fbbfa6e
3e5fafe1d24492886ab9847de57d8f697a5d7a01
6905 F20101114_AACAVC rodriguez_f_Page_65thm.jpg
7671c91b7a4fb1f3fe42d99159d33e2a
416f1e197f3fb668af9cfe60e949b895f4d10810
6993 F20101114_AACAUP rodriguez_f_Page_86thm.jpg
6f24551180b973ea92de6a7f10f6ed09
cec83fedaef6bb09a1700feada482ae4694ef1e9
23336 F20101114_AACBAJ rodriguez_f_Page_38.QC.jpg
41baf39c51d78ad9d2c769ed36d470f2
c072046cf7f1d186c1022a3b7ae19f03ab22b1cc
6559 F20101114_AACAVD rodriguez_f_Page_91thm.jpg
7864beeb77464146cba05d014d0662cf
f1dd843ab29c07c6c75e14f9d94f2adc93b623f5
F20101114_AACAUQ rodriguez_f_Page_11.tif
4d795fb892d9d97a79b961bd863c93fb
3bdd7be51713b4d0ac27832c9205d4c86a212414
F20101114_AACBAK rodriguez_f_Page_16.tif
798cdd554984f11fb0a05d4fb5e3a91f
f2dcc0afda79ee167ba1903238985e36f56188a8
F20101114_AACAVE rodriguez_f_Page_02.tif
962804255f206b32bdedf4cef14c58c1
fdd49394142b137cca456458e7bd925f4b25b705
F20101114_AACAUR rodriguez_f_Page_85.tif
8532ec21c2499d498628d1a0ea5885ef
9debf93ee23bf01ade93a53d8e26d9703a7e0424
74287 F20101114_AACBBA rodriguez_f_Page_06.jpg
63a8a1d07e14ffd1e58a0f0ed5c6f590
eae4792f1be58aa383eca6d8bf209b6e26c82049
2009 F20101114_AACBAL rodriguez_f_Page_23.txt
3b2e904eafae9839bce72207c2c4c2d5
72647d3dfdc43299ce664e3669ca3d49164c89d5
1730 F20101114_AACAVF rodriguez_f_Page_07thm.jpg
ca139a6eadee6666b35939183cebdc77
919d96704f51b872547b42d8f9a4ecf5b41ebeba
23623 F20101114_AACAUS rodriguez_f_Page_48.QC.jpg
962229a6bffb1df2de0c364243046435
f96e2cfb38729a163c0b76db1c1f37dfe66f22c0
75642 F20101114_AACBBB rodriguez_f_Page_08.jpg
e8cd44974529c035fd6fa83509e1f1ef
857a170af630667e31f1ae53f46886451a5362ae
F20101114_AACBAM rodriguez_f_Page_21.tif
37b3e29a43cc015ff08719389d8e89be
503ec47dd6cdf6b716babfd9c09bf03c2ee57e30
23822 F20101114_AACAVG rodriguez_f_Page_59.QC.jpg
3cfdf8560aefcfda1dcb76b7ac94b71e
251733e572ddbe4f6658d2d80385f4580f8b5336
4787 F20101114_AACAUT rodriguez_f_Page_92thm.jpg
0279f83a21e631f33d82e07049fc4983
7f15e5b83c3978063fcf847095891057a98623b2
57998 F20101114_AACBBC rodriguez_f_Page_10.jpg
c03a64188ec0d4e9d4a0934ca31d9bb5
b1346017d89aad003ea8e2b3bd52cad8a0243f28
112759 F20101114_AACBAN rodriguez_f_Page_77.jp2
9c7c23f30fabfc2d6d10e78d74152da4
bbc23e54c31a8e901fca44b2a189386aaa827311
5334 F20101114_AACAVH rodriguez_f_Page_04.pro
ca5768072d6d33b4f629f90e1554e26c
a860db2478bcdb37aee005463ef62731419b6b03
24659 F20101114_AACAUU rodriguez_f_Page_42.QC.jpg
d832412a2e5c4c49e7d779bf2a1a4c59
c62c860f4ba103612672679e8ee3fdeb15cd9613
75692 F20101114_AACBBD rodriguez_f_Page_11.jpg
30d9c9276e6c216ea089136aab651ce6
95225e53dedb8251e45f537380d01f02ee3835e3
75269 F20101114_AACBAO rodriguez_f_Page_57.jpg
94389e81440862272d479f2560f99501
573fd099d4757343a097b4b2f08dde375d84aef0
5777 F20101114_AACAVI rodriguez_f_Page_90thm.jpg
a35b8af6d81fa18c98bc2b5b2ae8245f
c23d5818c42ee691fd9bfdbd05c43c6426b95bbc
14686 F20101114_AACAUV rodriguez_f_Page_80.QC.jpg
f456479d6137602d55f499ac03696629
cf8306d2b22755e93899095730840245674cad91
71472 F20101114_AACBBE rodriguez_f_Page_14.jpg
961e9168aba49ea0a53069ff47359f86
adcac7281f0a1b9eb4a01656cab6053d22a85298
25434 F20101114_AACBAP rodriguez_f_Page_74.QC.jpg
a337dce6d7c1f627e9212f85ae5cef95
8bc9368827b81cb57d9425aa555d5e3d33b176b9
24022 F20101114_AACAVJ rodriguez_f_Page_65.QC.jpg
86726cd92f2235253de8382c039d0306
4da0079c723008e4be41d89df0c20cd779bbb188
F20101114_AACAUW rodriguez_f_Page_33.tif
351710cef1762a6280e71b79ff0280c8
be7a897243058facd5d90000cc490026cd0e8e72
77927 F20101114_AACBBF rodriguez_f_Page_16.jpg
a417429b190dc8b679b06035fb676f75
78a221c0609b867d2274d7083f08c9d48b73e6f0
7039 F20101114_AACBAQ rodriguez_f_Page_82thm.jpg
5d0545c48677ae627e0a138b2f7e1ed9
a8567ef318d10b63d9e0b2798d5d0930743d82e3
48265 F20101114_AACAVK rodriguez_f_Page_36.pro
b98302d9c4801733856359661dd5c661
4bb7480471c03ddf807c16a20e7bfa1b24489baf
2146 F20101114_AACAUX rodriguez_f_Page_47.txt
0140265ebf2d6a1c229f218e70a437fd
887dcdaf9773316300d1f6fc98d0e427770c8c9e
75497 F20101114_AACBBG rodriguez_f_Page_18.jpg
06fd3df22333c4676bc92b478cc65b2e
9928d848bdb37a6a1b38fe78cbbb652349394fe8
2070 F20101114_AACBAR rodriguez_f_Page_77.txt
0ac365dba449c4424f6846bfe01164f8
09aedd733285b4072b7ddef5c786cac7b21c333a
176 F20101114_AACAVL rodriguez_f_Page_27.txt
679df5f21163e009a87275f3be7f1351
489324f6c13a157d544448c6684dc30e31e955af
41684 F20101114_AACAUY rodriguez_f_Page_50.jpg
0a06e2ff33c230524751be691c24bf54
6b3fede7b839f20f3137c4d62c107831ee7d2cd1
67553 F20101114_AACBBH rodriguez_f_Page_19.jpg
4a9abf7d867c3a3d74d5a022a1ee78d7
d03524eb61f491b6f6a7d99bc0fb7b5ba43ce9d0
251 F20101114_AACAWA rodriguez_f_Page_04.txt
82734f36a626a634d1b815b422abdebf
2c61ff1ce915e9477e99c1ecc4014df328e503db
F20101114_AACBAS rodriguez_f_Page_22.tif
50f3068563029eb1dc6f8ce102ae04d2
ab170d5ca41849fe14515203a63c187c5f5de146
48556 F20101114_AACAVM rodriguez_f_Page_13.pro
b8688d9a7fe803a6b29b4dab4d7a963d
6d199d8463906d6d556c34b60d3446d175993470
24559 F20101114_AACAUZ rodriguez_f_Page_01.jp2
a22302470838598fc4ad2f862b82622a
3da58a3722fd4854bf8496f7005e6002cc7f5d7b
78833 F20101114_AACBBI rodriguez_f_Page_22.jpg
2205a9e7b74f0148b4fd1343964df62b
82b227bab75f9660918e4f09878846c98af618d2
6686 F20101114_AACAWB rodriguez_f_Page_11thm.jpg
f27ba6295e21c86e25eecb966bd6619f
d8f735bba9f5067a98f8a3a0a011c542e5b9c2a9
6931 F20101114_AACBAT rodriguez_f_Page_46thm.jpg
3efbee4924938faff20cbb87d1833104
960bc3b60020d78f46fec5b2b70482972502b291
5203 F20101114_AACAVN rodriguez_f_Page_26thm.jpg
20d30b15877431a754869e2b7986ce6b
eb938d43f7bf3d5ba6845e3cb6566f0d233fbc04
F20101114_AACAWC rodriguez_f_Page_24.tif
a921dffcaf7e29e044a3603bd2952e91
12d689aef51ccc7193f55ca87374ae23193f51ca
53543 F20101114_AACBAU rodriguez_f_Page_92.jpg
d068ef8e055bc37b621e3a05d50a9708
c7227ddc3eb57b129e046d6f8036c8fecc09d390
52056 F20101114_AACAVO rodriguez_f_Page_86.pro
23dc93d59455d06df667b110c64334bb
65c12ed5136d741494242e8055e8c575d101054b
72939 F20101114_AACBBJ rodriguez_f_Page_24.jpg
d260ac999f000586e11dcb4831137771
4055a13687cbf51b497a78bb3fc3bfdf3add1ff9
35522 F20101114_AACAWD rodriguez_f_Page_54.jpg
286c4091ff90c039585d1f266d56630b
0d710d8a7a6bfa979b16a0b72c64400c4bbff8ed
54600 F20101114_AACBAV rodriguez_f_Page_71.pro
f80aec3a7483fc41c033b3266ac28db1
a9b25f1cea59bd3c39b64d832181b8197e82d53f
50338 F20101114_AACAVP rodriguez_f_Page_95.jpg
3c5a6bd628cf5df8b9991aa1f9e92018
1347b260429a8c74cc7e19e614069d74376f18fd
60776 F20101114_AACBBK rodriguez_f_Page_26.jpg
7bf264078cf3b989d496998d415dd188
eafc355503bbf471deb58d36ba9d11df6860ce6f
28502 F20101114_AACAWE rodriguez_f_Page_79.jpg
6f75125282a7b0f9b894961187d9dad9
4482c9e352aa8e6e106fa941f7d9d603a1a8eff0
115333 F20101114_AACBAW UFE0021020_00001.mets FULL
be9ba9356c04eeb9ea42fee208a10a8b
7ba01615276d579ec6f99b370100544078ec87e4
51734 F20101114_AACAVQ rodriguez_f_Page_21.pro
0010fffc8fbcde8c405e86b8e8476cd7
d2d808616b4157e1cd52e6e7673970c0269029ab
60858 F20101114_AACBBL rodriguez_f_Page_29.jpg
248931caa7529b1b7456056ef90db9b9
252e94aeb9374bc803125e4ec07692baadf107de
25215 F20101114_AACAWF rodriguez_f_Page_85.QC.jpg
8705323e59ac3887bfdafe2da244377d
ac188b15a6e864b3d7af6273b9ba2777404b9fcd
107463 F20101114_AACAVR rodriguez_f_Page_63.jp2
7e071e89fe7fd84327ed5bd690d54707
d8844c824d398e8726fba80a7782f43c240b240e
43446 F20101114_AACBCA rodriguez_f_Page_52.jpg
a9b3d7dd1c302a329d2e85b8b73e9a4a
814867afa16a0ba2359e95ab2b8027c58cffba3f
27960 F20101114_AACBBM rodriguez_f_Page_30.jpg
06ff75479a5a511d1e96ddd1980c94df
4f07843b137f74ef3aa0553ecdf2ad81f5f6a163
F20101114_AACAWG rodriguez_f_Page_78.tif
e233619b7041b25fbd53be0821e1b69a
069a72509ceb02c321bfb043c06cf376bc19e011
2938 F20101114_AACAVS rodriguez_f_Page_30thm.jpg
4c394fa07846c53937cfad499bd6273d
2713cd3f0cf40a68b0c7e967b6ed1b94edb2b5f8
34748 F20101114_AACBCB rodriguez_f_Page_53.jpg
441a77ee2a9cc8ebbef24c46067288ac
bb3024f99dc09215a229e5dbebec5e037f014b96
72409 F20101114_AACBBN rodriguez_f_Page_31.jpg
92a73ac28642df1735fca70e718c647b
19c82fcc18144e8912089724948bff7bf459ecd1
6952 F20101114_AACAWH rodriguez_f_Page_67thm.jpg
90dd0fb5fa6a1a052b1e9e84e75838e0
56e6db07c670c00b8281e0ee6a207ca61533fb4b
24397 F20101114_AACBAZ rodriguez_f_Page_01.jpg
7ef738236f4cc3e291dd570c71d9fb53
8afe1a6c68ed1499396923f4bc3136861a9e9a62
2548 F20101114_AACAVT rodriguez_f_Page_79.pro
4892c437aa0effd11f72505a3386106b
fdec39a460883dbce8ddd7eb42f7f085bef2c775
36649 F20101114_AACBCC rodriguez_f_Page_56.jpg
c8e6383359d379e95f2ccdbc46ce42da
ef9b5d0187da6a3205ff9b0bf7ccf3e04c8ea850
74807 F20101114_AACBBO rodriguez_f_Page_33.jpg
03af1ed482a8e965e0f09f1ebebe0895
d707d637d30125aeba797ef1e112858c38564e13
73894 F20101114_AACAWI rodriguez_f_Page_77.jpg
365671cc669a39e85175fc516dd55aad
b4d1def67989ad4c78a9e2dbecc48b8508ed0e7e
16243 F20101114_AACAVU rodriguez_f_Page_04.jpg
81ab8625a8b1d5217226f2b0256c0ee2
908ba91404f1e3b2b686bf027f656b6762397fa3
72821 F20101114_AACBCD rodriguez_f_Page_61.jpg
d9d1b2f221131324d86607f4b80b9695
97c943ac9ba94ecdf0869926cb063692115a5c54
77280 F20101114_AACBBP rodriguez_f_Page_34.jpg
3edda7fa2bf5d7e5b7c09006e5b11d13
966b173488b269830e39abbf172b94903318013d
118535 F20101114_AACAWJ rodriguez_f_Page_22.jp2
b74e9ff2568273d201fd0b5fa5425de3
56927e1e58ee94713b77b01548968c4d7c202be0
74506 F20101114_AACAVV rodriguez_f_Page_42.jpg
f2fff67654bbc7f0c5fc0d1d83b61763
03acdcab4337a9cb31ba1db13daab9fd863c8bb0
73782 F20101114_AACBCE rodriguez_f_Page_62.jpg
8ca93d9ca63cabad267a79cdb7d286a8
9e6e43955c9b3c2fca6dd133b4405b9794f8eb88
69059 F20101114_AACBBQ rodriguez_f_Page_36.jpg
ded38abcccf2e73aa02f13ced3cef591
9368a4c10863e33475fed727880396b127e36a98
F20101114_AACAWK rodriguez_f_Page_67.tif
2f5517587a109b71cd5d935f6e1614aa
b3a7fde3b7ec88c996c7c5c5903362675d7a8b24
76985 F20101114_AACAVW rodriguez_f_Page_71.jpg
0b46e33f5bf293a9eee3a4f2ee3d7358
4ff0388ad5481467b08f93499f617dc1ffb8f74e
74938 F20101114_AACBCF rodriguez_f_Page_65.jpg
0f828c177ddca45585c7f5e1874de1d9
8dc834a5a243cb0b33bf7055a25dfc9e84afc08f
70738 F20101114_AACBBR rodriguez_f_Page_38.jpg
cb5aac99cd5a2907dc0ce42fac8dee31
08b62a8e279d9ef3be90d7d3ac33e129ac264caa
2016 F20101114_AACAWL rodriguez_f_Page_60.txt
b0456b2ce0be164cd2eb0f601b835173
7c7ea97f22981706e8d7b945e6606ad14d463a29
F20101114_AACAVX rodriguez_f_Page_07.tif
c8e2585604b18538281e30a70273440a
7ec72b0ad1a928b25e76a74339b27847cb240bff
70235 F20101114_AACBCG rodriguez_f_Page_72.jpg
e9c63b3c9d8ed8a1a73c7e9fb0e56e63
a7a895b428808545ef4c9a4db065c8c74a954b7e
1928 F20101114_AACAXA rodriguez_f_Page_43.txt
615437800174f4db1b126a819f46c37b
c9b133c7a4214c412e123d83e47f360fde80e39c
73189 F20101114_AACBBS rodriguez_f_Page_39.jpg
9546e25f5a4606264038021deec7630e
5ca113c1aeccc773eb1e3d2fd708b519c491a50e
1051857 F20101114_AACAWM rodriguez_f_Page_90.jp2
5f8e0e43ff918c6188d0c892627ad514
01ce42027d9043c3f1f794c7cfab7f77d8bcf6b4
113606 F20101114_AACAVY rodriguez_f_Page_85.jp2
0b912f432b5a2ac3fbd40754463ae9c3
be17fe616fe690ea13207f1852e38842c30d0f32
77898 F20101114_AACBCH rodriguez_f_Page_74.jpg
85e9792ed262293092d549524f8b92af
cf01655e8db90ccaaaca3633ea3b850902830d99
76457 F20101114_AACAXB rodriguez_f_Page_70.jpg
88ad8b9f1c7e2c3d7236d6a01852d525
171137923d31d4fc61174c458aea85194531e9a2
75567 F20101114_AACBBT rodriguez_f_Page_40.jpg
daaa3c3360cc0912e7603abb1e4898fe
f1b25abdff68a11e25c1458f17b6406242166f5a
6547 F20101114_AACAWN rodriguez_f_Page_66thm.jpg
4b786785f02a3a965c81d2b1d61a25b3
974c31a2d469beb351337c23226c8cec771f0ca9
24856 F20101114_AACAVZ rodriguez_f_Page_70.QC.jpg
f86a39176c235e42779d7d30ecfc8f28
cc8b7fa3bddfb8190e0a490280e766564e4bc11f
73448 F20101114_AACBCI rodriguez_f_Page_75.jpg
54b915a6cfd589b90214414bec90e7a2
c0080d1aa15d574ff59ab2525825c0473e61166b
37831 F20101114_AACAXC rodriguez_f_Page_51.pro
258f7b02e792865fc611214b89c6532e
117e49196562796f037e49d8eb71fc72494e5d65
75225 F20101114_AACBBU rodriguez_f_Page_41.jpg
fe0c7ddc7b33ab9f6e1135d08304b9d3
89faa27548090f7f5adcaf147f4bd820762b1830
1972 F20101114_AACAWO rodriguez_f_Page_63.txt
cb10bb671e56f66477325e3ce330709f
f758c0e9c2d18dcddf795ce758b43002342d3a38
32658 F20101114_AACBCJ rodriguez_f_Page_78.jpg
b002bc1fac2ad2c05688244e0ce0b022
798f1b89dca137f0ab8f3284344880b1e6ca6902
73920 F20101114_AACAXD rodriguez_f_Page_35.jpg
10979e8298c43b7c80a9129e1057981b
1bb1f05f259eba0a8bab9119328499fc9727bc49
69705 F20101114_AACBBV rodriguez_f_Page_43.jpg
54f89bca1987184cdc2158b5522ed09f
1ef3e4909596d7c4e0b11db784fc86b5f789ed44
8383 F20101114_AACAWP rodriguez_f_Page_01.pro
c6c76893590b8a485fde332ff908e5eb
db510d0f68adf8943401bb9bdc94a487ff592351
497574 F20101114_AACAXE rodriguez_f_Page_55.jp2
66568993e381cc1cc1a8c1bae315adc8
f65fdd433c79e827a08d16f4512ec631ed86049f
70200 F20101114_AACBBW rodriguez_f_Page_45.jpg
b353899a53893d081557013b4d7ff4d3
7fbf6e3b055997b9f78c3cde60351540f93d76f1
25143 F20101114_AACAWQ rodriguez_f_Page_64.QC.jpg
3b3b09a5c584cdce4c3eda0081f22ca2
be2e0535bae33417cfb9fc4bf64f2e976744bd06
46230 F20101114_AACBCK rodriguez_f_Page_80.jpg
94f3f275b5633c2e5fbc15f89d88035d
0370ed7aa358a04c65029763fac1438383e74937
F20101114_AACAXF rodriguez_f_Page_11.txt
13feaea208a506642875511022c5d72a
db1aaef9bad39e2116862f2e942134caaef4c345
75317 F20101114_AACBBX rodriguez_f_Page_47.jpg
197499062e6b5129cdba08c47545c348
10b50d032c6e65ba290286595b12f3e447959354
88354 F20101114_AACAWR rodriguez_f_Page_27.jpg
bd9810802e8530bda1ed30cf1e71a44f
6e622d5e0a61876ae87492549d77cca13f6f1a02
82418 F20101114_AACBDA rodriguez_f_Page_10.jp2
75af912c9ebae57ec59c3e9ca0b4b6ff
b86351399656002227306470369fc1e9c14cb901
67922 F20101114_AACBCL rodriguez_f_Page_81.jpg
ef8049049a606291cce9fe898ab83523
459e196eec51de63b102d98219bd7ba583f69b95
F20101114_AACAXG rodriguez_f_Page_55.tif
af9df1c7619e756a0f239365c9e01e8b
0d5fdbb2faf59cb05afbb5dd1de7ca89e69b90d1
71722 F20101114_AACBBY rodriguez_f_Page_48.jpg
7b5baf024d3761dee45cfc64fc6ec84d
b69481bd4fc5de04e9decd3f198da85d042101bc
53087 F20101114_AACAWS rodriguez_f_Page_70.pro
bfac2c3490af9119e63ad2c226c6b67b
ecd585a3c1b1feb872de3336fea68cf6d681347f
104641 F20101114_AACBDB rodriguez_f_Page_13.jp2
0c2cc9b33d28fcfeafeb5afb6590dc88
8fe087391eb804afee812108bbb70af5c649b8df
64850 F20101114_AACBCM rodriguez_f_Page_84.jpg
04a35169cb8f99436818a12879fa042a
ac692ad763bbd1b7a728079cc4cd445f2b7c21a7
F20101114_AACAXH rodriguez_f_Page_53.txt
db224bee87a65a7d949f85ac2f911b43
eab20836faed75ce56c0b8f71650b1282897e99e
52016 F20101114_AACBBZ rodriguez_f_Page_51.jpg
93aa1f4a2200301852aab8e8615977c2
5753dcb517d6e2ce721b3257e6bc7b2af38289ee
1051982 F20101114_AACAWT rodriguez_f_Page_94.jp2
b0fa7d3110e48becd24bea66186b753c
691b7d55db40d0614398dff059f10b73e39379a8
119005 F20101114_AACBDC rodriguez_f_Page_15.jp2
7a935e4169a806f5d72728cf1f3918ce
c5b1fed8daf20a72e5cd7cb5df21da1f1fffa12e
75668 F20101114_AACBCN rodriguez_f_Page_85.jpg
394af992cf01ebdf98e9dafbb9370b59
85bd32ad3f515b4ab3005dc99ec13dff0fb40bed
24041 F20101114_AACAXI rodriguez_f_Page_28.QC.jpg
67b44fa84485ee406cfd8b68dba17be6
42121c900104cf88416422699c613d09ee631908
56126 F20101114_AACAWU rodriguez_f_Page_22.pro
f36fa82a82739ac30226177e1e0d4dd9
84e60258dd607958f26c513ca6477f2713235dca
118000 F20101114_AACBDD rodriguez_f_Page_16.jp2
d8ab2b4612adf0f62b59003fa0b3df36
95a4abb3452d8cfaae0bb0b61203374a4806aaa2
73620 F20101114_AACBCO rodriguez_f_Page_86.jpg
93e61f645f90a47b1d4452a7c7277b59
f28e5e1766589f6b2ca56f68162a4cce9ce3d5f4
21873 F20101114_AACAWV rodriguez_f_Page_81.QC.jpg
3da36d67bb68ed938754132652bb654a
4c180c815d397a14ab51699d5dd5212b6e1ad719
113175 F20101114_AACBDE rodriguez_f_Page_18.jp2
4060bbd294541b8f82f2676d34d410ee
797e3f82f4346d351dd3b3df16c3242f0fa8ae50
68580 F20101114_AACBCP rodriguez_f_Page_87.jpg
d410f645f5e451e3b353e6857ee61329
e013eba5dd0af4a485ccf137612149fd5ecc11f4
113061 F20101114_AACAXJ rodriguez_f_Page_11.jp2
97b7a4bf5609483ea33c4a543ed5ae95
925a0ab2f9a04a5b26ea0c64d26a818c4c9fc1bb
17943 F20101114_AACAWW rodriguez_f_Page_92.pro
d26a26b3b2acb19f4df305e5a5c47745
0e61febf1b9b79a1a0b797bf73d1ce2a40d13567
101466 F20101114_AACBDF rodriguez_f_Page_19.jp2
3c4b7c7f75c02d3bcda12cfbf852ee62
554463cda3e537fe1889b3904dba35af0caa32c9
65436 F20101114_AACBCQ rodriguez_f_Page_88.jpg
a3e003c817c1c98bf6d2d20f51ed4790
d5eb453d95ee9fa47fd23a04ac0bc101efe0b507
117919 F20101114_AACAXK rodriguez_f_Page_82.jp2
70c1d71f991ef29234241a53d02de4f2
da379bdb631d0ac182338b873d3525b4f359bca7
699 F20101114_AACAWX rodriguez_f_Page_29.txt
ec4634e472754b2bb839c54939eeb2c9
0e1b6fc2f6168f2daec4d092633e9728abe6fdad
108842 F20101114_AACBDG rodriguez_f_Page_21.jp2
23a6c0c44c1ff70cdabdf066913b7057
78938c5528b5d73bc71c593f5404cb5b71a3210a
54464 F20101114_AACAYA rodriguez_f_Page_34.pro
810c24c46b383f4b0a05c8bd0a6609f7
37e3ac5bcbf8c3cdf8d382644e945e8a68fdba7b
62617 F20101114_AACBCR rodriguez_f_Page_90.jpg
290fcf63a664812c19ea02594cc907b3
75c23b8d9a99cf9921734e6dda5e11132a2f3d0d
F20101114_AACAXL rodriguez_f_Page_75.tif
8bc7d4b654523f1c24d0886de0b842b3
6001363f7277db06250433a65f0935c41a177aa0
191 F20101114_AACAWY rodriguez_f_Page_26.txt
996ec290f03956930a2ccfcb793c54d0
ccacd5c1234b2300df06185f6bc4a75e1fa140b1
107217 F20101114_AACBDH rodriguez_f_Page_23.jp2
52b8500b223908a392076ed52c6e9a6f
17068e914f51372ffb63eb808aadc469feed4f51
71366 F20101114_AACBCS rodriguez_f_Page_91.jpg
959a93ab8455abfbe4cdd6b4f8afd608
6c73f57987c2876b63e90e8555ee60e125c09086
59155 F20101114_AACAXM rodriguez_f_Page_83.jp2
689532456f5ceddec59b312625e06121
180ca2e39a23db1c44a012ae60847055d5a0b561
97274 F20101114_AACAWZ rodriguez_f_Page_88.jp2
b45a9f938d30a83f7f7b3cb522748335
52991703ec6faf0913ec2f194768106228c946e8
109632 F20101114_AACBDI rodriguez_f_Page_24.jp2
16ad4d2aac1bd052f82733f8b08d136c
149f29deefa0803cd542dd221f87f6bb98e2806d
1902 F20101114_AACAYB rodriguez_f_Page_04thm.jpg
49901702a04b3fdf9094181d36efe62d
a65e83e77f587b50bd05cdb5d5852291f0bccaa9
71929 F20101114_AACBCT rodriguez_f_Page_93.jpg
021426b196b4773a02715bfec536746e
50b595a14b811aad1e52b091530e4fb0e8a76202
23269 F20101114_AACAXN rodriguez_f_Page_13.QC.jpg
4960cbc48aa413d94d4d275663563456
3b9bfb4565dad469bae848ea72096645b3e150e6
58828 F20101114_AACBDJ rodriguez_f_Page_25.jp2
d1fa895ed055b492e850dcd98cab8068
7711d689be39a9910d9d828bf546e5d795a9c068
106868 F20101114_AACAYC rodriguez_f_Page_31.jp2
7d08b1b65c84c9bfc4e3f07f02da1c58
ab55a14265e1da95599b25d5f7bac217b908bba4
63713 F20101114_AACBCU rodriguez_f_Page_94.jpg
09c63696e29127a14363e55c6e66ba64
3d33d0534dba192c44ab617dede9ca1945d47fa6
73098 F20101114_AACAXO rodriguez_f_Page_60.jpg
2d332d53221cf4e8bba1c9a2cefe93dd
eed4f49d2ce5461ae7f9cf5c9ce44aefe06290e9
1051925 F20101114_AACBDK rodriguez_f_Page_27.jp2
c7bd4e95696334fe91328e3f1de7917e
c9aba2252ec4462b5bd930d3a2cc973ad64fa295
2066 F20101114_AACAYD rodriguez_f_Page_20.txt
27dcf30e0de0b60d6796b5d86ed52a68
aab31b9db543ee2eeaa50b7dc97902b7fa66d49f
107841 F20101114_AACBCV rodriguez_f_Page_96.jpg
6b95f9a8b609f000d919232928f13d28
9e636d99963b85a5f7a083fe6f8bff308377ec31
46950 F20101114_AACAXP rodriguez_f_Page_37.pro
70c3b7cc4c5d09b0b5e2c4154abd15ff
16fb2cee17693ca51bf67b0f82bd3cf31506d9f9
17404 F20101114_AACAYE rodriguez_f_Page_03.jpg
76ad93ab47eb0d3b15947d38cddf5b69
5337304da3d0e690592c59377ec1c036d888080d
5449 F20101114_AACBCW rodriguez_f_Page_02.jp2
44025b4b2597bebe0bc79a83acef22cc
d13e218ba4d3746a2279b2fbec7f6b350d5772da
118183 F20101114_AACAXQ rodriguez_f_Page_34.jp2
cf8caf3502601726fc679d5ce62a3e89
dbca7466c640529f7f80f7911a27ecd37e847b98
109258 F20101114_AACBEA rodriguez_f_Page_60.jp2
68f5160f7cfa8376c75981087be35404
9e10ab5d0ac9e1519875336398677649e08f72b6
471968 F20101114_AACBDL rodriguez_f_Page_30.jp2
5f972f60e6f6a4d5b497c7cf3e9c25f6
47c7e6f0fbae930d41583d92ceb73faf6bf178cf
24763 F20101114_AACAYF rodriguez_f_Page_86.QC.jpg
8eb662e938474339215f7e0749706f78
f1860ec236e9a1f6f2b819e4e9368e64b1503e17
16994 F20101114_AACBCX rodriguez_f_Page_03.jp2
e4640370b836796777183a0af8791ff7
4113b740f0c3bc6ca2e53d7ea6c9476ca094b77a
50817 F20101114_AACAXR rodriguez_f_Page_14.pro
a6f198e088ece8b2a7053e288c9e3f44
7cd3bab8786c323255ff5906bf4b63b31e3627e6
110013 F20101114_AACBEB rodriguez_f_Page_61.jp2
39dd78a2674d7609ea7b6d96dca4c365
9748deb87356a742faba76a56e5cf26a7740c2c9
109507 F20101114_AACBDM rodriguez_f_Page_32.jp2
eef954066f5f07fdd96e3995fd91ef55
b14b8107919a5963ff557854eda102f428004852
113336 F20101114_AACAYG rodriguez_f_Page_65.jp2
ac9553ee5c7b338a4d4604bd4c6cb78c
b2b6b676cf95afad48d4246925fe6356f52f8b5d
1051986 F20101114_AACBCY rodriguez_f_Page_06.jp2
e641094901093f8ee3c3201eee9d61df
bfcbc2ec0f4e79b3d35b5fa6a6b6ef2b4ea53ce1
6676 F20101114_AACAXS rodriguez_f_Page_21thm.jpg
d1cdd2eccde5dd26175c64688ac4d5fb
ef6e1da8c8efd5e6b563e3fd5e2d47adeab2a3d1
112856 F20101114_AACBEC rodriguez_f_Page_62.jp2
f941cd4bacbfc7939a99b37c886862b4
7e8bbdb53dad946d982f550cc961c66d2441e428
112136 F20101114_AACBDN rodriguez_f_Page_33.jp2
fac82238d7b61142ca7364dbbfbfe861
7fc423565b323b7b75f8e545e0a27954135ddf38
6881 F20101114_AACAYH rodriguez_f_Page_35thm.jpg
d7f9028dc88c5890bb4224c44b44f456
89e8bcf37d29c53feab3df43b2b7e6573255f574
1051980 F20101114_AACBCZ rodriguez_f_Page_08.jp2
af0fbdcb87ca2c5431f9a3cfd5eb64bf
5122a62a36ba306b02e67104470aab273a941e4c
163 F20101114_AACAXT rodriguez_f_Page_93.txt
d69e090bc0c6a4ed477f5c2e52356012
086cbfb2537936ca23488ec3ff76520caa8680cb
115106 F20101114_AACBED rodriguez_f_Page_64.jp2
a94af7b823bc69a09329c70f49b9b0d4
90db763447e531b5356ed34a9945341c48e0ad22
106588 F20101114_AACBDO rodriguez_f_Page_36.jp2
b10e2c1ca0c5802ecdf8274794e36533
288cecd59bae51aa8a155f87bd0db9d562a539ee
11261 F20101114_AACAYI rodriguez_f_Page_09.QC.jpg
8055b6022b3a4e95977332528f8126ef
3291062ab92f8e2498051ca56c61b57d890b4087
76528 F20101114_AACAXU rodriguez_f_Page_44.jpg
ad1b3ea7fbc3a24cee80792a117c7dc5
7d2d21908422bb3be8541a6d83c847477988f755
115879 F20101114_AACBEE rodriguez_f_Page_70.jp2
418e68ed5f654e84ca212a78f6728d94
523007d464a442d667f91c82379099e38fb68cb3
108121 F20101114_AACBDP rodriguez_f_Page_38.jp2
d4048c27bbe96b722a9d5328e9fc9b83
1d04f2f7b30e5a60fec496322b708997f8368221
61272 F20101114_AACAYJ rodriguez_f_Page_06.pro
6bc79778c463bae49f35d6942440e5a9
6a9ba80e4151e15dc885e88d2049c5c5738a7138
24969 F20101114_AACAXV rodriguez_f_Page_46.QC.jpg
8a97ccad8b1d1ad307606b038fad2fe3
bf1b086154c4da56b5611605e729470e3059cea0
116890 F20101114_AACBEF rodriguez_f_Page_71.jp2
640ffb721965b51529e03b29036d1faf
08843afbde5740553bb704988e825d924395f63a
111792 F20101114_AACBDQ rodriguez_f_Page_39.jp2
d5dea51583f2c8789ac3fac014802d87
888c1897dd5481a0b781b3b05fe389e6feaae051
6701 F20101114_AACAYK rodriguez_f_Page_77thm.jpg
6911369ff7f014f2794115024d1982ee
895131864a88ffbbd06f1c06d3a415c93d679404
1051947 F20101114_AACAXW rodriguez_f_Page_96.jp2
12cafced74033c84a321d459a5231a69
5e33c866b81b92c1d786cd59dde6fa35f427a741
104213 F20101114_AACBEG rodriguez_f_Page_72.jp2
661db587cf1d34c2821705eddfd8a0a6
61fd0220d4bfa31f5404c9d2c365ed9053344834
108480 F20101114_AACAZA rodriguez_f_Page_59.jp2
7aaf0d72743c6316fa83f7483160d62d
e3ff0a54109086fc703e724adb00904bf118df02
106109 F20101114_AACBDR rodriguez_f_Page_43.jp2
32e629b36f430f228c5014058be5ef27
86ed705a5d1ef8031d0f6a6bb9fd376a37cc8a9b
114765 F20101114_AACAYL rodriguez_f_Page_17.jp2
d3447eb1de67e453cb24996aab289d02
93c3379098e32c19d100323146a16137096ca1bf
23669 F20101114_AACAXX rodriguez_f_Page_69.QC.jpg
b3f7bc2ac5cfcf41596e36a057f46e7a
acc9723a3fd4c3b502d1e221ab1d06741db416d1
44003 F20101114_AACAZB rodriguez_f_Page_89.jpg
7b5a73a107749a87d12589fb2d357623
3daddd6030511a845e8354043f3394b1d79b1ba1
114434 F20101114_AACBDS rodriguez_f_Page_44.jp2
bbba0efe5cf9fd15f0d95d5f96c12507
5c6ceffce829092c400eb702178ec2e010151c1d
5788 F20101114_AACAYM rodriguez_f_Page_07.pro
0ca5b3ba36a194bb67d19d8311edebaa
19e0c23b341d3ee1af22186ed904fbdc28c39461
6588 F20101114_AACAXY rodriguez_f_Page_28thm.jpg
cd1a7ffb154898319c2f26edd7b798d5
915bf679f6a2aade200ffcd83e4a21230f2ad031
45024 F20101114_AACBEH rodriguez_f_Page_78.jp2
39a6538a0e9f32e054522397548215e2
12985cfc50d22cc597f0a29e14a28aaa602c83b2
113045 F20101114_AACBDT rodriguez_f_Page_46.jp2
1178e8e6c598b9692add5ceee101991f
13b0620feedf78e9b272ee2995086c448ae845cf
1051946 F20101114_AACAYN rodriguez_f_Page_26.jp2
8b3efc00d7960561ba38e23fabbf779f
6eb82ad8966d56e08c209297eb21993a416e364d
50087 F20101114_AACAXZ rodriguez_f_Page_48.pro
1085222327e93173b596ad270cc1b18f
8504aa85048fe64fc7c6efcccd9c4f4bc3d777f5
602773 F20101114_AACBEI rodriguez_f_Page_79.jp2
bbdfe9174972f70463c965dd0232817c
720a53cb7f706d78366de7d8c7ca633b937a5719
F20101114_AACAZC rodriguez_f_Page_76.tif
2f148ac33e6373556ffb9b16c5ba743d
32840638897f7afa4aa8bf94b6863a06765b01b9
108685 F20101114_AACBDU rodriguez_f_Page_48.jp2
9a57ba230020d0d4594f7cfea033003a
59705ab86432f70c43f6f12c0cb469737c777de7
6375 F20101114_AACAYO rodriguez_f_Page_36thm.jpg
235f5cb85290249897758137db6adbf7
f27b4df32e584dff3a269f0fab4c7a153f929dff
1051885 F20101114_AACBEJ rodriguez_f_Page_80.jp2
ba9b914e5997a829dd021ee42fa494bb
6ebfda07fea6205b11103f71c79d1be4701f5da5
F20101114_AACAZD rodriguez_f_Page_94.tif
a400633997d31fe966c5283233d9c33c
bb30fca642d1359b7ff44c94ba8b0072325c9d93
93187 F20101114_AACBDV rodriguez_f_Page_49.jp2
b612bb4d2364c077fb11500c63a7088a
db342a5eb7b505c57f03277b1e7de28d496a307f
77895 F20101114_AACAYP rodriguez_f_Page_73.jpg
1f96dcf594940d98a6e85bef063234f7
85c2c0611d079b2e9fdfc112e5ca2aa7e1751635
99493 F20101114_AACBEK rodriguez_f_Page_81.jp2
3010bd716d59718db1694eff236d23cc
ce9a2cb11779c1ec390e9fb0843e3af6ee2d65e2
78437 F20101114_AACAZE rodriguez_f_Page_82.jpg
f897d8b0f2eb8bc95eb92afd17c240a7
8620e5ab7c85e94294cc52fa63942e6034fbb63c
53538 F20101114_AACBDW rodriguez_f_Page_50.jp2
7d2db7fd1796ed991e5c321ac79c091a
f168404dd68b771a03100eb6b7a26b8913acfc57
5231 F20101114_AACAYQ rodriguez_f_Page_10thm.jpg
df11131befe777203ab4fa587a7f983d
0fe7fba263cf42694ad2af86ca091daefac5e02f
95671 F20101114_AACBEL rodriguez_f_Page_84.jp2
7e0963ae703b6b9faca8fc591eb2f0d0
b1e3e7e1dc1ef435758fc4d2be1329637dc75270
43891 F20101114_AACAZF rodriguez_f_Page_84.pro
35a37ccfa89d812135ac26ee661af60e
10f7be28ac85201d6ea0fbf4d64f5311e9aa8ec9
659013 F20101114_AACBDX rodriguez_f_Page_52.jp2
9144ff929a555e9f9c99d863a9602c4b
632470d0a1f9cc3ad4eb7f750aa3d47b14194b89
4544 F20101114_AACAYR rodriguez_f_Page_98thm.jpg
e3e83831ccb5654f8ec589b71640c2f5
f548d42d86d7e614f915fc12a44022a6495b58c2
F20101114_AACBFA rodriguez_f_Page_15.tif
ba79331c3f7a30bf6df17fb59034f432
e33c28b27e72122b6fba5af9561d79376c836c1f
70075 F20101114_AACAZG rodriguez_f_Page_13.jpg
79c2d7ddfec6b4dd071f2af8744e0f5e
b1e05b668bb3f7cc6f01a89b3d65e6f177877654
544409 F20101114_AACBDY rodriguez_f_Page_53.jp2
efb4fd835f6397b80b5efab333228095
241e1aaf2190a544539e4dfefc78a5c384c61463
7033 F20101114_AACAYS rodriguez_f_Page_22thm.jpg
89c760f6e0cc1d2764778fcd77098614
18eb14c937b8d6b34eb9557c5016376222d82ede
F20101114_AACBFB rodriguez_f_Page_17.tif
65385e6b98bc1a86e6fbc19d0ab9b4ce
4015dcb8ec1c6b976a92ba1bd38cb52afbba48a7
102056 F20101114_AACBEM rodriguez_f_Page_87.jp2
3fe4cf58290d15c7cf83fe4fedcf8ceb
0eed128fd38bd27bbfeed98d487acf3b234b5871
42162 F20101114_AACAZH rodriguez_f_Page_25.jpg
daf587bae9b2dde324de76ca5d5de7c8
50b348d817d43c782cd67b00ac38e16d5456ef19
722251 F20101114_AACBDZ rodriguez_f_Page_54.jp2
07abcb2176d534c8afaddd1de0ebecb2
3fd54dd53559160040e125fc4473cf0a3b6c7597
6617 F20101114_AACAYT rodriguez_f_Page_23thm.jpg
c97ba0e57ed60c0df54f1ad936caf35a
aeaa70245c86242c505c44e8e6b05a8b25476292
F20101114_AACBFC rodriguez_f_Page_18.tif
0361abb2d98188ee19ad0e95c4a2bbe5
03c82cb39d7d9a8f66d65298e5a6ead355838446
962732 F20101114_AACBEN rodriguez_f_Page_89.jp2
4e35d4f892b7bb2c88ab5a70b4a90caa
c417f6656f1a7a98b797420acdb34526b9949a5b
2119 F20101114_AACAZI rodriguez_f_Page_40.txt
0c74c6f401c5a7fcd7fa79879370800f
009c53a14ed89180e8b21e1f2b17f7a42a1f82ce
277 F20101114_AACAYU rodriguez_f_Page_07.txt
0a4880b1155b751be7637523d7c15ee0
136cb70b4ab6d945244342475d11cb4350ef838a
F20101114_AACBFD rodriguez_f_Page_19.tif
765e53e52ae395e2df645ed68af1c9c1
9f4d199a80105c5cce1eb007bc0c6adacbe52c49
F20101114_AACBEO rodriguez_f_Page_91.jp2
7fbccfefb99ad36720a212558d4a56ea
71c71048219d207e8d67b8e2943c4b55e70bad4e
9973 F20101114_AACAZJ rodriguez_f_Page_02.jpg
ecea2574d429b11fd8b3136916a92052
879c78c113f7c01747d0fffe5cc22afb387c295f
F20101114_AACAYV rodriguez_f_Page_40.tif
243882edbbc9c562a517c77c4eb0fc8f
3eb49aadd8e86f16339f0bcc57722b282edb9c78
F20101114_AACBFE rodriguez_f_Page_20.tif
01e420e83a23e748a9b780c16588e939
fdb103d320af17c1ca24520008b098f2dc018c4a
1051967 F20101114_AACBEP rodriguez_f_Page_92.jp2
428267984bcf9f962d9f44952eae84b1
06c813c0f03b668c05b054147b024345dc4f8cd9
111082 F20101114_AACAZK rodriguez_f_Page_47.jp2
5f725426be1e313022504814d129e368
7fcc9908a536188efde4b94033a680f6841a9325
102433 F20101114_AACAYW rodriguez_f_Page_37.jp2
a9770e384eb462e7e2b3b1a7b959988a
1bd193f6a9924879f76d9b17abb992bc6e47f316
F20101114_AACBFF rodriguez_f_Page_23.tif
7aebcbfe26fcf71a1e50b7413a8ef6e3
3fb200509b8065b236bea86d0ab1d7a1d1caa4c1
1051977 F20101114_AACBEQ rodriguez_f_Page_95.jp2
b1c27a403b81c3a84299022852e2b9a5
cbf356bdb3b9d9c00848e3ba487ff569311255f4
19121 F20101114_AACAZL rodriguez_f_Page_29.QC.jpg
9e47198b837ff970c146a9531e563ee5
30fc93736c8d1fda6eee61cad7dae1fd1b8ddf2b
F20101114_AACAYX rodriguez_f_Page_56.tif
a65788cf0644d18a74ba34cbf4176961
e29fc1c4ae72834a05bfa493c852c9130a958b32
F20101114_AACBFG rodriguez_f_Page_26.tif
565876e2932956a427ca5ed51af982de
8f88e44f867ecbc49097698071f7c6939f48fbcd
790576 F20101114_AACBER rodriguez_f_Page_97.jp2
feb176fa5ab84c67f418e7bd814522bb
ca608d6064d713d00064751c1fcf15f45ef7c6d0
2089 F20101114_AACAZM rodriguez_f_Page_33.txt
37fb92c6fd3aab7bff72f89b20a33cb6
798d9b82b0acfe785ece6014a938c50a0642e2a7
113872 F20101114_AACAYY rodriguez_f_Page_58.jp2
95ed75f3312df142489b463bbda56cbc
28090d0138e4b1e9bf133c5a04b3ab7b94507fb0
F20101114_AACBFH rodriguez_f_Page_29.tif
c70c3a773ad6d7a0eae413038282f52f
5ea3222051fd770c13642fd3f7ab05a36161de33
69507 F20101114_AACBES rodriguez_f_Page_98.jp2
c3ee1a16d06a9df62f1e43243005e7ad
b806645302f1dc2a8df76d3b453f6e37b7bfa1f4
7347 F20101114_AACAZN rodriguez_f_Page_56.pro
4a8a01a2bb182cfca351d96614baf126
dd9a7cf6771b9cfd3e157cdc7a5c048e3ebf3782
3915 F20101114_AACAYZ rodriguez_f_Page_56thm.jpg
5af906ce68c48d75ab4da76ca54b59f8
ae2253092d013ace6a98c0c6765d3313a2309d34
F20101114_AACBFI rodriguez_f_Page_30.tif
a5b587b22af049651db921484923e7f8
c28da5de6a9dc98ef4da20e46af6960dda9ab74f
F20101114_AACBET rodriguez_f_Page_01.tif
907d621ed2505b8ba58d078f0fbfc88c
369cefa7b8d69230339f9a57133582b0d884dee4
128 F20101114_AACAZO rodriguez_f_Page_95.txt
d5304a25d7e1c6d9fc2319b5b8b134d9
175647d193bc610f3e4f3019f27ec734c0675730
F20101114_AACBFJ rodriguez_f_Page_32.tif
542ce5a4c67d1cd75e38c373ed1ef83d
ecff6dd5eb6b65eefff9000b2966f5ac7165e56a
F20101114_AACBEU rodriguez_f_Page_04.tif
7e2be3fb917bb52fcce51163b9a1cd1d
35c4a6913ed3d40055c2f2bea82366fe5871db00
23636 F20101114_AACAZP rodriguez_f_Page_45.QC.jpg
fe180057443f6d4f78191b8b2a5ecfb0
5e23284836f113b80cb87e5901e0566b0e408bf8
F20101114_AACBFK rodriguez_f_Page_34.tif
c7a0bb0de78200d76204fd640d74eff3
5cdbcc09950e91131700c86ddd8f87bbab35c221
F20101114_AACBEV rodriguez_f_Page_05.tif
c66319292a88c5ab2e6a97031ce6927f
f3b4f02e5d76e8172753339d1045afd4a899eb08
14052 F20101114_AACAZQ rodriguez_f_Page_83.QC.jpg
070400ac32c376021d71926362bc1e64
c345e2fd1fa5a28550a8203984870990f6fe522d
F20101114_AACBFL rodriguez_f_Page_35.tif
108505ba78a612b97e98da2d4b7a68b3
eb93a727fdd0db1f52f4054d0e87ce3438dc0504
F20101114_AACBEW rodriguez_f_Page_08.tif
46e16b20671e04b6f7abcf360a488b4e
5cf9925b991d7ddf505dceaae7947686e9928b4b
F20101114_AACAZR rodriguez_f_Page_31.tif
3817fa9dfa6939903ae9f714c7f4e960
ccd1d510623377bdefd579b3b61d8fc5512ad05a
F20101114_AACBGA rodriguez_f_Page_61.tif
cbec98f388709ea1cf5efba082930b69
d7d6998aed2986998900c872d86845e90f62c9c8
F20101114_AACBFM rodriguez_f_Page_37.tif
fb81887965e163c043c2a0c55fe73439
5c669e54c1d712efda8c75e442328a0c1b5a9630
F20101114_AACBEX rodriguez_f_Page_12.tif
e07b69ca623bc2fe1700244f677642cd
bac79dc1cd8bd6ae4b9188f6ab6a89c120883f88
2019 F20101114_AACAZS rodriguez_f_Page_38.txt
0c0b05fbf1d767a78d2e9f269088942c
75eb0f5a283a701952b15de6f30df74207570f92
F20101114_AACBGB rodriguez_f_Page_62.tif
6c07323736266999af2043ead69e3d96
0623556b39685613dfcf53f9751b9d1095e95c06
F20101114_AACBEY rodriguez_f_Page_13.tif
0068a9473758c5c43aadcf1fd1a77517
193ee7fd8a6fbb5c3f04c4b5d1bb8b06a784ba54
6781 F20101114_AACAZT rodriguez_f_Page_63thm.jpg
e81a4686fa4140adfa3d311df4f38016
90f1823d52e05289cb1af18f7599f05537c50c18
F20101114_AACBGC rodriguez_f_Page_63.tif
69b44df9b238219e871965b3e9800328
028d52c046262bf5f46944edf43f88a493f8c6f5
F20101114_AACBFN rodriguez_f_Page_38.tif
7ffca6ea91a1dc5352ba2e8a0ca33626
216499bf8d86ae5f6ad686c8e45f8b71bdd67e99
F20101114_AACBEZ rodriguez_f_Page_14.tif
e7d775e22585c74cf152c5aa8d61313e
921e3114ce08f474c06bcb055047f52902b790e5
1327 F20101114_AACAZU rodriguez_f_Page_02thm.jpg
7e6d8eea2529388bffca4a5123ec1753
5a917bc8cea1a38455c06384167f438b07461d05
F20101114_AACBGD rodriguez_f_Page_65.tif
5e300716faa991a972520989cc320c75
2c3ea29dbe1c8ce425995dc32516675164eab0a8
F20101114_AACBFO rodriguez_f_Page_39.tif
0ee714e5fedae71260cbc1a643bf0dfa
8a1f87e8768caaae5f08f4ba2ee180a4034b912e
3047 F20101114_AACAZV rodriguez_f_Page_79thm.jpg
f29ceb58d870b8d8c7a9350bd0e582c0
0e4eed15238b31feeb559df76afc1b8236daeae6
F20101114_AACBGE rodriguez_f_Page_66.tif
ececbd9a96c23a1d917dc781ff8d6482
ca6137b739cdf14f92cb4770001df2f4194abb0b
F20101114_AACBFP rodriguez_f_Page_43.tif
f37e33e7695023fe440bb84ab65ec338
4d31ca8f8714e9622c6a263fd552901c91538e57
115164 F20101114_AACAZW rodriguez_f_Page_76.jp2
ccb92245b862fbcf93bd2e3cf9b42d11
1677e49e0049ef87a7e50889d51f2035f117ab1d
F20101114_AACBGF rodriguez_f_Page_68.tif
1ca1004cccdc71d4ea9596de9062997d
b13f92e63748210f39e76d8d3487854f956cfd8f
F20101114_AACBFQ rodriguez_f_Page_44.tif
fb28619cee52210862f75fe17de938a4
2d5e61dc7879443c1e28a38cdad9529dce0ca534
F20101114_AACAZX rodriguez_f_Page_09.tif
a6ab310c362b5853426069ec111ed56a
e028d07b55183bfc62f8bd3ec90b7737a089716c
F20101114_AACBGG rodriguez_f_Page_69.tif
bcd5eefd01241e9da1da4775b634bcd8
0b6f886c6b1696f16193b7f0042ca67f5acd41e1
F20101114_AACBFR rodriguez_f_Page_45.tif
459e122756647fdca2f5df67484663f1
a32883383e167d0d17627ba10fd59b92ae92b214
6533 F20101114_AACAZY rodriguez_f_Page_69thm.jpg
4393c82dae152cb5c791ee1ab9d7aa89
d50b8b157e209c464f657a226c9c237e97fc4885
F20101114_AACBGH rodriguez_f_Page_71.tif
5c52974c65100c122dc594977c153c12
bc6e3cb5a80132e4b9f63a7f94a285e8972063cc
F20101114_AACBFS rodriguez_f_Page_47.tif
501d54c72c280a6b34dd4cc8f19dd96e
f9310c3579b7d0491df0d329b88dca089a3ba03f
16391 F20101114_AACAZZ rodriguez_f_Page_92.QC.jpg
e396c71f787f6c2617a45c3047581fe0
e3d64846ec3a622461639c37292688161df8cf74
F20101114_AACBGI rodriguez_f_Page_73.tif
825d49b2002a1c2465eb687a524efb8e
8f75b14b28f021ee21891c6a55e05ff49310e06f
F20101114_AACBFT rodriguez_f_Page_48.tif
625208643a9527ad1c9ee01f51bd8a1c
18655b08c1c6d058bae2fb58a97e18e9674fd281
F20101114_AACBGJ rodriguez_f_Page_74.tif
5e94bcf0a6816eaa8e294464265aced1
0d3999a3fa3e7f0ab24dbbde247ff9f58486d856
F20101114_AACBFU rodriguez_f_Page_49.tif
788d6808dbd13212451702f818a744a2
a90471698155815e61ad596e96d02bd30f624e4e
F20101114_AACBGK rodriguez_f_Page_77.tif
faea939047dd1a15e2838cd53d938f60
5958a855ca29ab1adaa9c371317402e3e1658683
F20101114_AACBFV rodriguez_f_Page_52.tif
6575993303273c82c5b4939374ac6f9e
f88b979445b9c0c47dde92976773faab4ddd4ea9
F20101114_AACBGL rodriguez_f_Page_79.tif
dfcbaa3ab1bb8af948628ab5854a74e9
f988ea5428277586694e35fe08d722975007eae1
F20101114_AACBFW rodriguez_f_Page_53.tif
5679db4ebbe54e6f53c566755b14a4dc
fff8d206207c10ed876481bb607d83cc48e8cc63
F20101114_AACBGM rodriguez_f_Page_81.tif
a828b456d5a1dec199e02e105eed3116
c9ffb1350b0c6968319bba1b55d6ca8048238107
F20101114_AACBFX rodriguez_f_Page_58.tif
9e14d1db3ec61b99fef9e358106c15df
534f661bba1d2a280be4d96f55566905b5fa17bd
28908 F20101114_AACBHA rodriguez_f_Page_09.pro
cfa784f9f0a63bf8eade23835805648c
b88658c392ab6df1c4edc3ee4b8180f479369e10
F20101114_AACBGN rodriguez_f_Page_82.tif
5282d39a0d2cd2d8189444875d095218
05bb46cc91b0bf3174b116b0279e9fbe4aea9d0a
F20101114_AACBFY rodriguez_f_Page_59.tif
59d31fb2518ff7eb5f95a28364586d59
ab4ae5b625396ecd113a09849da7ccc14cfe2846
36353 F20101114_AACBHB rodriguez_f_Page_10.pro
7b1553a781c1a43a3ab2d0e810156b5d
9f2e6829390ae79aadc2a0a679cb676f561103c3
F20101114_AACBFZ rodriguez_f_Page_60.tif
f7dff7aff692040aec2703b887140a7b
37e3080730e0e472e585d45db3323afa71d8236f
52504 F20101114_AACBHC rodriguez_f_Page_11.pro
0270807e9d9d7860d53d8fa367dd2e03
4ae0a80b280a173a37bcf266f9387fc918d3d0b3
F20101114_AACBGO rodriguez_f_Page_83.tif
c09b75ec8ba1169ea659fff201204d45
b7a39dc520702d4babdfcf9e7f267d761c1dacfb
55321 F20101114_AACBHD rodriguez_f_Page_15.pro
ed774f47699152ab706c378cead1089e
126d04f654bc97904be183293af181940f35380f
F20101114_AACBGP rodriguez_f_Page_86.tif
9d6cab3c3b5a0c9a3ae5c2af06354ab0
39fa74c8f83d3e74815067a6edcc9598baca07db
55848 F20101114_AACBHE rodriguez_f_Page_16.pro
5c9f0374f7f4dd7b053e8a5ad5102de3
0d121a445db0a451db227b922b4ada115f1bf137
F20101114_AACBGQ rodriguez_f_Page_87.tif
971159f2f817c5c934e02af1f1436dde
3f37d54267bcac7a73fe900695811e95d7369f83
46704 F20101114_AACBHF rodriguez_f_Page_19.pro
8ee0bc0cfd499256aafca8f768508aa8
cc120b1115ef7daae93394b5d9a8649349648380
F20101114_AACBGR rodriguez_f_Page_90.tif
021734e5663011a12a84767c752633de
cf43901c9d9163b9d151d38db5c46442cfa2321d
52326 F20101114_AACBHG rodriguez_f_Page_20.pro
feb1b5ec0de42eb96e7c70b265d24c14
3150b959b6e7d62fb395a6aac7d4e668ff4b59e9
F20101114_AACBGS rodriguez_f_Page_91.tif
b5b80b6dee8b1be0f2b4f1dcc1f97409
3a6fdc4c2f5ff710a2047f19ab5b370bac520cf5
50847 F20101114_AACBHH rodriguez_f_Page_23.pro
f38fd9ed781781b710acb8622a674b03
3a596043c306d5407396282f9959c06ce8457769
F20101114_AACBGT rodriguez_f_Page_92.tif
5bf56d3382ee4f2a3b852d628ff97297
fbbcb98b2f5bd0284fe9be119477585072e2622b
51210 F20101114_AACBHI rodriguez_f_Page_24.pro
78ded714c8643a4aa50510297437915a
9f7540ca6f66238e1371abe0ad7e10916aadbbbc
F20101114_AACBGU rodriguez_f_Page_93.tif
b3813c021ec6f29a546f5a02c7bef28b
a860195095ffcafc91571e26a82eca2ab2d047cc
3558 F20101114_AACBHJ rodriguez_f_Page_26.pro
11897a8af89ed1cecd1b4956943e9527
a22afa0a88a2fbd2e08520884c3e76620afb563a
F20101114_AACBGV rodriguez_f_Page_95.tif
6e589787d56c7aaef0c44c6cfdc44071
f13f4d377a30595ed8ba5e736ec0d62202ceaea1
3224 F20101114_AACBHK rodriguez_f_Page_27.pro
f8316d507e424d4216c4b106691b37f3
76c2ede4f60b908f1b58263bee6aef9ccbe84921
F20101114_AACBGW rodriguez_f_Page_98.tif
ca68d5a1910ab2475ec4296ad237f019
5df8d442fe95368df53c2c0a83feee9ca1864d84
6526 F20101114_AACBHL rodriguez_f_Page_29.pro
1cf87eda28546f3483a8babdad322688
d856dea4e2e1bf0c81c50f9c6bf38d4accd3a77f
935 F20101114_AACBGX rodriguez_f_Page_02.pro
dff54c2ef394aa3f641bd3f8ea23d2e6
829dffbd1bc631b64324e736c79b145c9612eb23
50818 F20101114_AACBIA rodriguez_f_Page_59.pro
b5c5b6fd5934636911772aa899684704
1a93b243ee8597d0427dc51167159d3349965b31
50963 F20101114_AACBHM rodriguez_f_Page_32.pro
41304974c276316f327a533d10741d89
a980fdd2fa1904488596916a35ecb1a0ebbf1790
6972 F20101114_AACBGY rodriguez_f_Page_03.pro
056f6ce8a5817d573191fa87aaf6549d
5cbec3439e21f8731b69da1e80338718bd044d3a
50941 F20101114_AACBIB rodriguez_f_Page_60.pro
85a2b74063e42bcfbba2090783e3b905
9536fda2ed7b0ce08e694baef6b25d6d7f50d890
51932 F20101114_AACBHN rodriguez_f_Page_33.pro
6fd0b20cedacab846d39ff057f72336d
c70556b91ac0c49da2c5bac38d491b04e5c3f281
70865 F20101114_AACBGZ rodriguez_f_Page_05.pro
fbdde372b9edb9d94d80a09a14ad534c
d209a01e0280e70049826bb77de7788f5854d51b
51058 F20101114_AACBIC rodriguez_f_Page_61.pro
e0050ffed2d8153208097da800ee8d1d
dc741bb237bee8c4be9f79889d52ff0db740e454
52525 F20101114_AACBHO rodriguez_f_Page_35.pro
5f5f09e0d1bc6b36cad08fd54b25b54b
a9c461b7526d33893766ea571fff30119e3cea79
54094 F20101114_AACBID rodriguez_f_Page_64.pro
cb0b8b54efcc8a9db9811713d49a0e45
9bf1413fa402187befe401ee3173ba30958a9d41
54693 F20101114_AACBIE rodriguez_f_Page_67.pro
f12672f51f8c8718c5fbe70cca441e8e
316415a67af9f6b4b1d247b3ffd2aedb0505923b
50341 F20101114_AACBHP rodriguez_f_Page_38.pro
f98d746f4651603020a4df84e3326ea4
bc045bce568d2d3b3394ead8fb363d0e432bae86
53787 F20101114_AACBIF rodriguez_f_Page_68.pro
f147222318ef2aa5d7746a1a2ebd9628
14a3f75ef502feacfef43ec2b69bf27941a44f26
52502 F20101114_AACBHQ rodriguez_f_Page_39.pro
5034d11f2eb5f2e404551d7c3bb4d0a0
47b2a9573cf838a2ec5eb59d3b7ad42342d9bbc4
51841 F20101114_AACBIG rodriguez_f_Page_69.pro
ea50f9409312cad008cd9c4ec25f87a8
c1d8cddcd51cde6b8c878152272799d796f1d7d2
53843 F20101114_AACBHR rodriguez_f_Page_40.pro
327c48f490a17f479493d84e8039fec2
8685dbe0dbe148742e8f669c15cc3bf6596425fd
51194 F20101114_AACBIH rodriguez_f_Page_75.pro
969a10bcf5067bc4dcb1ec1ee8b5d125
41fc7ea73ac67b51f2eea1d7fd6d60be22c9d13b
48714 F20101114_AACBHS rodriguez_f_Page_43.pro
785b17566fc2f88ef5d0908861b33927
2b9efaeb0f7a6810fa5db5fdcee49c9439bf5bdd
54394 F20101114_AACBII rodriguez_f_Page_76.pro
141fddadd5b3b60847d63d7622ab6ce4
4fd53055b08bb05a30e76db3217ca0ae5a8a74d2
53938 F20101114_AACBHT rodriguez_f_Page_44.pro
c796c9a3b369085e42e2beed308ca2bd
ce04aead96a2ac36993ac2f965b643886fa8b798
52538 F20101114_AACBIJ rodriguez_f_Page_77.pro
27ab2f3698900a6c1ac69ec2a6d9d4ce
82a7431328c79fe090d973d40cf45cbf8aa9b1bc
54973 F20101114_AACBHU rodriguez_f_Page_46.pro
93ca0cd690f82ef14eb89af83b7e8df5
e7e2d7b4c618e02c1346ad2e492766467196353e
45455 F20101114_AACBIK rodriguez_f_Page_81.pro
c55abf0f7c47f64f2da1d39cd091cb5b
b81f90346df9ec818a6469905a983d1c83d745db
41779 F20101114_AACBHV rodriguez_f_Page_49.pro
7659edcabef1cbfb5bcb8d0dc869fca5
69c954e2d5f9739f53baef9e8e143d4af7020593
54559 F20101114_AACBIL rodriguez_f_Page_82.pro
5fbca804feea687a62b4d9b1282ae65b
ce39450d85d1f493b0efe7fa4d1061fcb017bada
5551 F20101114_AACBHW rodriguez_f_Page_52.pro
42fbff2033cf4fdfbe37cbd7d872d623
298a73adb0454545e37c0725e840cde730c538ce
F20101114_AACBJA rodriguez_f_Page_17.txt
b5da8c2f70911476c106a210a848d9af
c7016f68bf8a718b00c7a1a87a951aa3b0121268
53959 F20101114_AACBIM rodriguez_f_Page_85.pro
4d15d9a2424222294707201605e75629
47e11d7377b7174514bf514b766846b9fb8def89
6764 F20101114_AACBHX rodriguez_f_Page_55.pro
f407e7615bbb3a278c6ff55ab8b5ab2a
bf1bb6165d5b40cc5c14231251a892f8c86ca334
2087 F20101114_AACBJB rodriguez_f_Page_18.txt
758a94a55c17a1a61294124ffe35f536
3eda3a7262cbb3ee3d55d79468cee1f229a5ea53
47165 F20101114_AACBIN rodriguez_f_Page_87.pro
a46e0fc1e08e75f5d2a716069b374fc2
6c2897a05490e6c125ad9b9cacd2215291284eca
52462 F20101114_AACBHY rodriguez_f_Page_57.pro
eba6003abc4d4633968c07799978e805
735ef6ee5bd8fbc64970c750a5e671029e10dead
2051 F20101114_AACBJC rodriguez_f_Page_21.txt
536d9a7ace31877239408df7ae7e6a02
05a7584ada66c47f67c93d543acc1cd39618619d
15667 F20101114_AACBIO rodriguez_f_Page_89.pro
92b663a40c1c774427979ff49364d4ba
77a6da1f4ab4ef57f33d26431595a490ed18a795
53410 F20101114_AACBHZ rodriguez_f_Page_58.pro
1f2a98b704acdf7dfc5f11a0e246f515
12782e48a14af2c38731aea87fa5fca698e0a77c
2207 F20101114_AACBJD rodriguez_f_Page_22.txt
c7d94e5d3656d1b0fe5c816f1776600f
af91e7aee9ec98afa2272cbe1e2b4f3224550df6
9848 F20101114_AACBIP rodriguez_f_Page_94.pro
935c11ab35ca1ac5907cf6f39f657921
6e6a0712b6e48b7a56f1e85d1eb1b6004368d779
F20101114_AACBJE rodriguez_f_Page_24.txt
dfa5cd8d3432328f764e61f8dde0383b
5614e91801744362579cf5d979d3ea90aabcb8e5
65623 F20101114_AACBIQ rodriguez_f_Page_96.pro
84aa562a251b464b145968af8bf26cfa
571e88ec0bc93d8a8f173f72b235d46e8a0ce2eb
180 F20101114_AACBJF rodriguez_f_Page_28.txt
400dd32c04c7878a291010e5fa964aa8
4eef90fbe747aa13150fda84b299da1be9ec5e50
30742 F20101114_AACBIR rodriguez_f_Page_98.pro
a7bb2fb654b19e0330afd78d5441b826
7e9987b047dfbd994baa84ffda7fa1ce65b5a492
430 F20101114_AACBJG rodriguez_f_Page_30.txt
1e81bd7c210d7014c6d94dc6d45fdd01
51ba543f2fffd153f20a2435d1188f4e98025dd7
464 F20101114_AACBIS rodriguez_f_Page_01.txt
82e084574c0ab886686ed2964cef80b5
2cb41442bc85fb54ee215a892379751ef1575e71
2056 F20101114_AACBJH rodriguez_f_Page_31.txt
ee96e561f143f03cbf83b1975e79aeab
29409ec9715648fd38315d95774c5a1a5374d17d
90 F20101114_AACBIT rodriguez_f_Page_02.txt
f81427ad47fe5e6bae895ab5709d52b5
813e34481e3acf69aae1c128234ada065c25214b
2075 F20101114_AACBJI rodriguez_f_Page_35.txt
f839692468f5a777fc437ae6ecf6bb28
633ada0f7492a67a2c50491f6b96931e59dc10ee
337 F20101114_AACBIU rodriguez_f_Page_03.txt
d7b053a65601d0ecc9ea5b5b7b84f902
4627f0a570e570e78234a57ea892c15fe14f9353
1950 F20101114_AACBJJ rodriguez_f_Page_36.txt
12a284fa047d8101ea70febb26693a11
5f36ad9339e54394698d6a1cbef62596cb4b396c
3087 F20101114_AACBIV rodriguez_f_Page_05.txt
de34336a0509b9dfa09344f3f94ce71f
c7aab9b772126e415168ec6122bfa01ce3616b13
2084 F20101114_AACBJK rodriguez_f_Page_41.txt
c99e2c843dca59b14dbf630fd452663a
cae77b3fbcd90ad44083ff962b0086355e249b71
2639 F20101114_AACBIW rodriguez_f_Page_06.txt
d153c714e6f7735556747005f27c7eca
9558992c435bad5255ae85904d04ab7d9664b3a9
2129 F20101114_AACBJL rodriguez_f_Page_44.txt
b1f9ba193c4ff71eb13da6d0360c316d
37a46770fe9aca951064ce522bd79549c5672180
2266 F20101114_AACBIX rodriguez_f_Page_08.txt
f5060ead9831f271d5cfe63d2c7cf779
96ad18037761d1756ee30a49d973418af2542820
1936 F20101114_AACBKA rodriguez_f_Page_72.txt
cfba5700b0425a72eabe5b993df754c1
87209f74bc4b3fe0c3fa811d3f4da6934d9bae61
F20101114_AACBJM rodriguez_f_Page_48.txt
309d273f4981e3e26b6ab09a993e0598
0851f1ea6e1b754e301d9277ed31bec9b57ad2c2
1211 F20101114_AACBIY rodriguez_f_Page_09.txt
126d80e3dd31bb7c88bba2c921308d14
c3e9152eff38ca6e4fec8ee1cb5004a2c594a15f
2204 F20101114_AACBKB rodriguez_f_Page_74.txt
3a1f9c5f90f46846f6091d97eec58408
53f0ba6cbc1a9fd641979b300510e30b23d3a89f
1031 F20101114_AACBJN rodriguez_f_Page_50.txt
6a6d25c1c5652e0d9dfc1269b799e298
27ac35824b3af35cafd1f36957b86507fbd79042
2039 F20101114_AACBIZ rodriguez_f_Page_14.txt
bb205bb385045f5f08da751b987f38a9
adcca4b8bbc921ec7dbf53fa26dd352ed5812344
2015 F20101114_AACBKC rodriguez_f_Page_75.txt
c3232607e2e17f5a65dc2fa94a9f3c35
2da4e17c57313f26ff8ecbfd127c0dfccafea3ef
1725 F20101114_AACBJO rodriguez_f_Page_51.txt
4ebbbb7e06cec6119b3caff63b939d58
eba1ee8169888a8e015ff81c006b81d7e7e79fbc
2147 F20101114_AACBKD rodriguez_f_Page_76.txt
e1af16fa7d10b86668df89972f76fdcf
392b73f2fdf22a7fa10526e2b345584804ec4d37
261 F20101114_AACBJP rodriguez_f_Page_52.txt
9b3e1f063e8e0b8004634c5862019d47
5a6d161daa6023b32ec61727f15fd8caf192fbdd
394 F20101114_AACBKE rodriguez_f_Page_80.txt
a681cca8c0a9991b74bbeaf2dbdfe78b
4052d02d1ad20bc39e1e565ff758375b07b67aa6
425 F20101114_AACBJQ rodriguez_f_Page_55.txt
2dba5a68a248698e0294a077a04d28b9
9092e43f60490db5480a6b4bd98ce62cfa5bc66d
2164 F20101114_AACBKF rodriguez_f_Page_82.txt
52f38fc9ca64faf1d052cac1ba54978e
17ad570df07519bb79fc3021483489549bbe7de9
1865 F20101114_AACBKG rodriguez_f_Page_84.txt
a8cf5a0c54de149e2d67529ddebac476
f9718d84669352d0d683f187682c9f40ef16af46
2112 F20101114_AACBJR rodriguez_f_Page_58.txt
abeca5bf8e182b2d1e1d1e24fbf01cc6
faf68428babdd921825c0ccd5b772c281107d0a3
2138 F20101114_AACBKH rodriguez_f_Page_85.txt
8ec7f070ecef8d587e65e15541cbdd65
15e704ac339f0543aa28868354dfe3ca9c5b26b6
2034 F20101114_AACBJS rodriguez_f_Page_59.txt
c788a416f9f55942afdd04a40453147e
465d4d59aa56de700404e752548a573f67f4efa8
2054 F20101114_AACBKI rodriguez_f_Page_86.txt
e7053b2c8de13531f33062ec486675d5
36eca9b8390b65e2fd579d96827b5a172dd2b541
F20101114_AACBJT rodriguez_f_Page_61.txt
86d449b11780a5e84640045b12ac450b
5fb3f21c89ce4b31b06d69df727cc616e6eccba4
1914 F20101114_AACBKJ rodriguez_f_Page_87.txt
7965f07b1a14ddb4c1e30a83891e66d2
03b0fa7073a8a8d97d434bf516a3136b48833206
1819 F20101114_AACBJU rodriguez_f_Page_66.txt
208a67022876e59586c35f21d5dbc2f1
2eadf2aaa19ac1db052c26e5ecd31769ed170af0
1791 F20101114_AACBKK rodriguez_f_Page_88.txt
47e482eea01088174b5dbf5404c889e7
7bb03f3b9c5a80d0947fb3b0e10c0acf02c522de
2156 F20101114_AACBJV rodriguez_f_Page_67.txt
34c3e86759036cc85a2db15b0e39d9a2
c0aa60c715c5a550ad07940dd274ccfc5acab257
307 F20101114_AACBKL rodriguez_f_Page_91.txt
b1c640fb9fe9146e50ea4034d8f71ffd
7fd581b242ac0c7fe0754a99e9e97e621033e131
2118 F20101114_AACBJW rodriguez_f_Page_68.txt
e8b5e1a4120a537d1955f1e1f85f46d6
6c5463029342cf450f63c0ee1131ca099fb127e9
25852 F20101114_AACBLA rodriguez_f_Page_35.QC.jpg
b9edb1b3129144c233bc4ea0a26dc960
33e13b969645df5ee51d83648f4615c232418b3d
906 F20101114_AACBKM rodriguez_f_Page_92.txt
71c89262e0bf5c40cda77dfe7254c10c
843d66d3530f4408e12871ac311f5f1eaf9a7eeb
2045 F20101114_AACBJX rodriguez_f_Page_69.txt
ccbd5da5f5e82e1fe24d53af688403e8
cff70dbd2402e636bfec92d835ad1e09b20fd7d6
10629 F20101114_AACBLB rodriguez_f_Page_55.QC.jpg
5b793345a978430cd8e63bc43366cca5
74f20eabf656297f8ac667e423de00495144cb2a
930 F20101114_AACBKN rodriguez_f_Page_97.txt
b5d2eb77823477c62738c2483b7f9af0
37559e3cc90c7397b4bfdbc06fced2b72adc8eb7
2094 F20101114_AACBJY rodriguez_f_Page_70.txt
3cd77f8ad7af51f0eb7186bee004991c
751a936b5e037aa3b46cc26a70f73dee00c1e3b7
5076 F20101114_AACBLC rodriguez_f_Page_51thm.jpg
0240acc7237a91e5449df494e4724843
0b61927c122aa29ddbf6132f0297e196188f0030
1257 F20101114_AACBKO rodriguez_f_Page_98.txt
11d7ef9f48a6fd8af06445ac1767ae45
98ae9f19ddfffd8b1d9d018f6ef3b9bed8fd10eb
F20101114_AACBJZ rodriguez_f_Page_71.txt
f56876e6ecdd30b673da6eda121d6d40
3e78275ac4f3d1c268edd9ecacc80dceae5066d3
24422 F20101114_AACBLD rodriguez_f_Page_39.QC.jpg
e811777dd576789ab29caea9b910aa86
813dbd9b0022ff9137939855d7654ae9ff800ced
2422 F20101114_AACBKP rodriguez_f_Page_01thm.jpg
6708f0d7049248097808b6154ade410c
89cf646c4c5c6824183f1274ebaf3074e4ff4b34
15194 F20101114_AACBLE rodriguez_f_Page_12.QC.jpg
95cfacf26cd2926eab8229d6e67eb688
b2093a507279199527dc2f2927772e8487cab12c
6230 F20101114_AACBKQ rodriguez_f_Page_13thm.jpg
20d2cd854ea0c8b1a3bc81a629681588
63e4f5753e3fed62cb3c0ba7bf2e793b0e6af8b9
17875 F20101114_AACBLF rodriguez_f_Page_10.QC.jpg
2681896ce1019549f27523ca59cf22b8
fe837bcc5be39bdb53e2b188c338043ddaffc826
23956 F20101114_AACBKR rodriguez_f_Page_14.QC.jpg
6ab603fa0f90bf4f856f6ca9ea02a2d3
86ef76ea8ac63fa07f9eaa610f35e7d025a8f3b7
24940 F20101114_AACBLG rodriguez_f_Page_41.QC.jpg
2bad713a95f7e177240f860bbbe03cdc
8131c57f6fad005fec5bbe510480f3a25c4e2c69
24579 F20101114_AACBLH rodriguez_f_Page_18.QC.jpg
048402852923a4236d6f6066f89dd821
d7a9703e5b7488bf192849379aec3dbc3692bb99
F20101114_AACBKS rodriguez_f_Page_41thm.jpg
007732c41b6ea9f0c1ced9f7994dc913
88ed7468bd900838f2c5a635a22fa50bc96144bc
5689 F20101114_AACBLI rodriguez_f_Page_29thm.jpg
6195f3705c4b7f8cb98c051276176d71
aac71b08ed899919d65b4dbde73505a5e7e48522
24298 F20101114_AACBKT rodriguez_f_Page_61.QC.jpg
82c9c7e68e74a6617e2c160bb9acc1ba
d36daefd9923a8d54a7df016ec0dc01d92145ce9
23047 F20101114_AACBLJ rodriguez_f_Page_43.QC.jpg
8b3d2664109b579e9b89a62528bdc9d5
9ca4694da9462e497732b5f6faa0b2837d5edf32
13293 F20101114_AACBKU rodriguez_f_Page_50.QC.jpg
6491a9c199dcebaef6cc77ae2da82f9a
a2e7332d0f0bb931ea2b7ca5301eb3f80c8f7ca2
6866 F20101114_AACBLK rodriguez_f_Page_20thm.jpg
7c6bce82e34287de7882373157008db6
f17be28907ff2d2501c3fe91fa331af3152e2803
26004 F20101114_AACBKV rodriguez_f_Page_34.QC.jpg
1c57adda28d8adcf76cad2d303ada6ba
6b25fbbffd3665f4369df67c2fe0c26256c72301
25332 F20101114_AACBLL rodriguez_f_Page_73.QC.jpg
807bb73d3f46180dc06d9a851acad97f
d1dc264860597800e752536c87fa3f64957d6768
6919 F20101114_AACBKW rodriguez_f_Page_18thm.jpg
01148d01cbf20f7dd611597264c07b0c
9ff477feb2cbea39c4618e8e4dbdbb6ebf351043
22129 F20101114_AACBLM rodriguez_f_Page_91.QC.jpg
0e0fc5b2c09bc0f101bfc96b98cfc2c0
0de8cff2fcd2a791811cafbbd50a735bde5408f4
22742 F20101114_AACBKX rodriguez_f_Page_60.QC.jpg
41facaa99afda146e03e8f920ced47b7
34b94c1faf4d6c7e3bc1fd8a21059ad69db51b75
20203 F20101114_AACBMA rodriguez_f_Page_05.QC.jpg
d71bba8b99687d76a532ef147688af24
00301f1cd84115012f505b6f97c22a8287f13896
4013 F20101114_AACBLN rodriguez_f_Page_83thm.jpg
55a481ca1a41ea704ff3138bdf2aa4df
d0b1d9e7793eb9a25dc98bc947e42d52020344eb
22630 F20101114_AACBKY rodriguez_f_Page_08.QC.jpg
062770407f47f54c7f9e78f26a291b29
465313ae60e99e0a896c3de6a0048d599f78d6d2
3914 F20101114_AACBMB rodriguez_f_Page_52thm.jpg
3493678d16dc82f044b97fd12c1e1c72
11edb7d2a544cf94144005f85eb8e3947cbd617b
5146 F20101114_AACBLO rodriguez_f_Page_04.QC.jpg
97cd833a7ccec4a0c32dd38e627de2b1
7b9fcbcd2c3a8c531390b2720857e5398e79c209
6912 F20101114_AACBKZ rodriguez_f_Page_17thm.jpg
6002ebc41186a1fa01f7cec0a0bdf6c3
794fcbdaa89e1788130f092273a1443bea192404
6812 F20101114_AACBMC rodriguez_f_Page_64thm.jpg
073609c0fdcc6b947174014144a96803
8b89cd1b874d027b44cbafde44995c2025d3046d
13417 F20101114_AACBLP rodriguez_f_Page_89.QC.jpg
99842d584b17b05236ed7a8ea70a5daf
492a385a1fa585be1ef7180a1b24d3d0435ccc75
26060 F20101114_AACBMD rodriguez_f_Page_22.QC.jpg
00ac8a99f768913c4a84c7861d7cf978
178aa9f1f8385d890c5c0cf21197fd5f3d682991
6811 F20101114_AACBLQ rodriguez_f_Page_62thm.jpg
b3d93ce86ae8c8eb554da0b6c69e4c8d
bb21e71f9177bb87989bd65ee04a302052bf9e44
F20101114_AACBME rodriguez_f_Page_33.QC.jpg
649473ec410e46f67d41106467d7640e
98167963018c8377b3055e83e56521d6df6e376d
5366 F20101114_AACBLR rodriguez_f_Page_93thm.jpg
13d71485e2efece4fa2ea736690d05eb
7754148a3019c63c36b234d76d317a338a20469b
22697 F20101114_AACBMF rodriguez_f_Page_37.QC.jpg
2866924b51696a687ebdd26a9478d40d
ab515d0ec138a06038a492ef69a2916de4cd9e28
6773 F20101114_AACBLS rodriguez_f_Page_32thm.jpg
b929aec6aca1df74fa3f3f2c25fdc57b
6f6856b7756be466159bc6cc2d3293f3f9e8bb02
29331 F20101114_AACBMG rodriguez_f_Page_96.QC.jpg
f3fc3909f00f0dda0fd7ec8cb3bc07fb
9dbfdb55d51f0128bbf500c863364b58f064a52b
7073 F20101114_AACBMH rodriguez_f_Page_85thm.jpg
74e6b97bf24a37289507cf0f5487e1ad
f5fc3ec0ab39f73aa698865666649cf0960d1a6e
6646 F20101114_AACBLT rodriguez_f_Page_61thm.jpg
54746215aea528f801aec7e2576913f0
bc66767fe71765cecf99de2e72e6c52ac260df45
6734 F20101114_AACBMI rodriguez_f_Page_70thm.jpg
b73bf81277efc5083d6e3a448221801d
ca60848c0d6b33c7e472026d944b97ca68c6b43b
6654 F20101114_AACBLU rodriguez_f_Page_40thm.jpg
38a538f7a99d940cd6e2897d415874f8
2cc0d7d6a159cb80d43b0ee7eb610d0079b2c6a2
15967 F20101114_AACBMJ rodriguez_f_Page_98.QC.jpg
568c4f464179a8a5d7ede0739a843bcf
ab2231f353ed88d1dc3ce890795d3ee2476cd06c
4909 F20101114_AACBLV rodriguez_f_Page_07.QC.jpg
a25e2e7621af764939700a6ca1d34c42
dd7007a430cc20cab75d49b8a4ecb27cdb7ca1fe
23568 F20101114_AACBMK rodriguez_f_Page_63.QC.jpg
2974e4ea897d1ddb9e356d6ed91f609c
776a509a0712924ae9df02142a61fa5e8d75ceae
3412 F20101114_AACBLW rodriguez_f_Page_54thm.jpg
f1ef166e48eaed121bb58aa8a3ada659
8e05c29479120c2f892d365c270254ecd0564248
25183 F20101114_AACBML rodriguez_f_Page_11.QC.jpg
42e40ed5073aedebd3ea96d8b8880da9
1e31d129bb676e78aca6e9f0f8d1a85618bb19a8
6366 F20101114_AACBLX rodriguez_f_Page_87thm.jpg
ebf31c295d89158e09f4c4d178d98765
bca39e2133d075d4881103aaaf2fbe56267b1cc7
7760 F20101114_AACBNA rodriguez_f_Page_96thm.jpg
7201df84afe5fdce9417c551f67abb18
2da5c2e0fb9edb74d44d1718544a75e506f2a371
24865 F20101114_AACBMM rodriguez_f_Page_17.QC.jpg
3a56b1a98e8308e1cee2d71a41f4e87b
80ea1bb8cef7ca4483c9f6472ce70e4a5739b49d
20209 F20101114_AACBLY rodriguez_f_Page_94.QC.jpg
cf268ec1765575be5cf9665b2e7f859d
3ba1186528bf304380973382a9a73c3824268111
5744 F20101114_AACBNB rodriguez_f_Page_08thm.jpg
db8dbba439129491f1847075d0f9f1d7
58eb6a4e2a9e43ff75627b659efb6c6043f941cf
6125 F20101114_AACBMN rodriguez_f_Page_37thm.jpg
a4f9654400f772b776d8be3974561dbf
6d6c15dc6adfcd81765809179dd16b5532bfeec8
4049 F20101114_AACBLZ rodriguez_f_Page_25thm.jpg
3224ee48551b4a61636a572f00a80176
639da695be74db6648a70c5dabeccfe6821b688b
11828 F20101114_AACBNC rodriguez_f_Page_56.QC.jpg
948b7fb39625cd4b54c5c20b4c48677e
61e09338913aeff654dc943f646fcefa2fce1752
6282 F20101114_AACBMO rodriguez_f_Page_72thm.jpg
44d0ad0542b5a64c93f5bd0aacf37f12
eac7621c08d29e7420f402ed8fc9ba98a7ca30e0
23569 F20101114_AACBND rodriguez_f_Page_32.QC.jpg
5a7afc8e4286d13539112472f39cd501
25f053159cf0f3cea982f51d88b6ef04cfdfe506
20170 F20101114_AACBMP rodriguez_f_Page_93.QC.jpg
635095926ba92555028d016cfda97a9f
2650bfdba8078760b4e1f99ef613a509f948bcad
22094 F20101114_AACBNE rodriguez_f_Page_88.QC.jpg
7222887ae33ee3e7255779b0a8f0919b
d3b4db5d641d1a42116a107211a83d4c353050b9
16282 F20101114_AACBMQ rodriguez_f_Page_51.QC.jpg
14aa7217344a40898592fe8e06f13f51
6cf844c03cfc74cb78ef321776434d66d7ea9b43
3639 F20101114_AACBNF rodriguez_f_Page_53thm.jpg
6ed3781e1ce96fbd20681bb5f857947c
18685d57ce93fcd92a1af496aacd8357cea58851
20082 F20101114_AACBMR rodriguez_f_Page_90.QC.jpg
0a5be8024171505dd69a2607781118ab
2a659874bce127642b9d37e88c4a1aeed09e3083
6772 F20101114_AACBNG rodriguez_f_Page_74thm.jpg
96a32f6ea2233c1ea8415a5895c406cb
83588190ce6754f890ff33c609608f361d17daf4
3261 F20101114_AACBMS rodriguez_f_Page_78thm.jpg
c72ae28c562fd3c0bd462142c2a23b8f
5eb8c5e02c18dadf5485b652fc57be83d7743953
4628 F20101114_AACBNH rodriguez_f_Page_95thm.jpg
adccb46175b1c2357ccef52b905e9f6b
ac542d54405516068777a1046f5d5f19a9a6be5f
1932 F20101114_AACBMT rodriguez_f_Page_03thm.jpg
37aec2afdff27075df6fd7d6711bb193
d9ff7870b0be6ff65ccdb2258794b4db343bde69
24868 F20101114_AACBNI rodriguez_f_Page_76.QC.jpg
41f947f3137f52bc990e22cacfc7965c
0e5f44c04e9f52a1310342055e3fd07f9ec8a421
7081 F20101114_AACBNJ rodriguez_f_Page_16thm.jpg
c9145f08e8bfa22702fb6ab4134f0584
9299078d573198412e887a8b4d71012b12740b17
5228 F20101114_AACBMU rodriguez_f_Page_05thm.jpg
0f55a46e7d472890a8854d0eda6ead12
ea9ec322b9ce412eeadcb2a60dbe3158a705bf60
24174 F20101114_AACBNK rodriguez_f_Page_24.QC.jpg
017aa66094f1d5743906f3f3ff224ea5
1d8b73f427d5d68490daf1e8982fb52c1707dd6b
24234 F20101114_AACBMV rodriguez_f_Page_20.QC.jpg
4dca70f8ddb4fdf5c88e06cfbe13a6e8
e19f775eaf9ef11d89728d59ce3e0e91778c1357
24392 F20101114_AACBNL rodriguez_f_Page_62.QC.jpg
5d1c7dcd1accb7a96c71cfab547a1a54
b57232244b8aab8b880dbf10fba1a4eef4dd39a4
5677 F20101114_AACBMW rodriguez_f_Page_49thm.jpg
0c20404d965ad8474c21bed0289ad651
e0323f5e939137552c8a2d3f312906a4ecbffe5a
5114 F20101114_AACBOA rodriguez_f_Page_03.QC.jpg
85cbdccf2b1e722e07238ce161518035
8f2ff47772a74cf04f9a4a1ad35a8ab4a7743839
21657 F20101114_AACBNM rodriguez_f_Page_84.QC.jpg
00db03692266812008de58fe1b078150
93ec0ae730d0fe789bb42ceacd2b5160eb029cd6
13431 F20101114_AACBMX rodriguez_f_Page_52.QC.jpg
1e3c067cde0f0d5219c4762db76c8619
84a5b2f39ef2a5af37cb19207b49d3b6434a6beb
F20101114_AACBNN rodriguez_f_Page_60thm.jpg
58be31304b956aff3cb8c221cab7fea9
b1ff00fdcbccfed9c70156cf90e2afafe093d9f2
4064 F20101114_AACBMY rodriguez_f_Page_50thm.jpg
c0d408a057d2770e2e545ab5d86b2ee1
e4df5b2e618c9687c5cbaccbeede0fc3bfe1a545
6470 F20101114_AACBOB rodriguez_f_Page_14thm.jpg
7581fdce32ca1dbfb74ac0a91fc718dd
8dec5c78b8a7b3663002663e98e1ce71fc720f9b
24861 F20101114_AACBNO rodriguez_f_Page_44.QC.jpg
e9bfef38a1a1aec5f51037b1628f5ce5
54e6553c166d65721113bb1b94d5c17a0f81372b
22738 F20101114_AACBMZ rodriguez_f_Page_36.QC.jpg
a125551fbb4f74049c86d1b0f12f509a
4f870fb038c67f551a0dec51a7fda8535bbb8489
26303 F20101114_AACBOC rodriguez_f_Page_16.QC.jpg
a61bf5ce4b444026ab3afb973e32a22f
c6bca6c6cec87095e5594c4887ca06a0964cb187
12073 F20101114_AACBNP rodriguez_f_Page_97.QC.jpg
1c392e7bdce3a11b752ad08fa7b875d9
70c191de0413e37180af1c237ebf3763890a8e9f
6365 F20101114_AACBOD rodriguez_f_Page_19thm.jpg
fff4c93a4d26dadab70f67c677c83825
0a86869ed0fdf59fee4a19147cbf855bbf4e0fc2
6620 F20101114_AACBNQ rodriguez_f_Page_76thm.jpg
ff85a1f57f36b46a83d374ddbc593dd5
ec8200956fff2713abfc780f97ee49218bb1ba8a
17060 F20101114_AACBOE rodriguez_f_Page_26.QC.jpg
82b53132d86757e82b6a8e4ba0fa0266
037dc8ab0db8f1a72b86f41f25360892a0c1f3ce
6728 F20101114_AACBNR rodriguez_f_Page_71thm.jpg
56f7539b6e9b90742ae3ce335698fe4b
41c5ce833cdb0139d30a4f11384a2a1cf7c2e92e
23581 F20101114_AACBOF rodriguez_f_Page_31.QC.jpg
a02d56dc223a85c8998ffc0ba53d7330
e1eea07bd9d4330e8a65be03798226f164f046d6
23843 F20101114_AACBNS rodriguez_f_Page_27.QC.jpg
1b6091452615eca3682cb8d053b0b2d7
9c723811ca7455f81d496527f58cb496d7c5e704
24544 F20101114_AACBOG rodriguez_f_Page_58.QC.jpg
4be72a9648ddad13f9862c2006fb7fb6
79db5094e62a426f109f014e5677bcc71f39ad8b
15394 F20101114_AACBNT rodriguez_f_Page_95.QC.jpg
1f4ec8b913c088624dbe7a6aebad6d85
62cce5918aa2a80857173fd5415cb2edc2c43463
6454 F20101114_AACBOH rodriguez_f_Page_59thm.jpg
18c99bbf743b3bdf00aac76f3c0bf7b2
5665a9d567f020690bfb1bb073725f4f8814ec8f
6524 F20101114_AACBNU rodriguez_f_Page_43thm.jpg
4ca898674e26de3b44d0efd988aeb720
e0f6a1673a776d86e5869d618a20d629543dada0
F20101114_AACBOI rodriguez_f_Page_73thm.jpg
003ce760ac925142fec3ae3cc9254d72
4382172571e51c9f0e32b17079fc9cd5f2315918
24104 F20101114_AACBOJ rodriguez_f_Page_77.QC.jpg
631b9b581a8cdcd4f41cc0efeadebbfe
53432ceb2171822614f1d4f50a6e73407947ddaf
24950 F20101114_AACBNV rodriguez_f_Page_71.QC.jpg
9e02b390360b249920f4b5a718847922
deebcb4c07a722a075429417635b3990c5b8b805
6110 F20101114_AACBOK rodriguez_f_Page_88thm.jpg
04b84fc2722e098fbb31a5ceed305230
3377c4b1c6d4602246b0b79d068e67a4f5bb96f8
10790 F20101114_AACBNW rodriguez_f_Page_78.QC.jpg
c9e376b0fd2860c9d55e17ac57babe82
6260dd3570533cac90649628ef3368ef948f7712
21036 F20101114_AACBNX rodriguez_f_Page_49.QC.jpg
87744229d3fdd9adf10be8fe9cbde404
f5af149701751d5819229d50e91d01f457e33932
149268 F20101114_AACBNY UFE0021020_00001.xml
b89498f0e88a4ad0aee1c8dec134a323
aa2013ed5360b3f40fcbe0aa65a67b14e60ffa94
3081 F20101114_AACBNZ rodriguez_f_Page_02.QC.jpg
4936345d42ba4efddfd41cd7e0ec457e
9cdf7dcc136c07f3157f1989e2053a0fb12749e4



PAGE 1

1 HURRICANE DAMAGE MITIGATION: FIELD DEPLOYMENT STRATEGIES AND RESIDENTIAL-VULNERABILITY MODELING By FELIX F. RODRIGUEZ A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2007

PAGE 2

2 2007 Felix F. Rodriguez

PAGE 3

3 I would like to dedicate this thesis to my fam ily, whom without this reality would never have become a dream. This paper will also be dedicate d to Dr. Kurt Gurley and Dr. Forrest Masters, for inspiring me to accomplish things I never thought could be done.

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thanks to my family, advisors, and fellow st udents for the help and guidance throughout my academic career; this accomplishment could not have been completed without their help.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...............................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................. ..........7 LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................ .........8 ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................... ............10 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................11 2 CHASE: TOWER DEPL OYMENT SOFTWARE................................................................13 Introduction................................................................................................................... ..........13 Tower Deployment Interactive Tool......................................................................................14 Red Rover Deployment Strategy.....................................................................................15 Cannonball Run Deployment Strategy............................................................................15 Ground Zero Deployment Strategy.................................................................................16 Blue Tarp Deployment Strategy......................................................................................16 Chase Software................................................................................................................. ......17 Chase Methodology.............................................................................................................. ..19 Input Variables................................................................................................................19 Load Track Button...........................................................................................................21 Load Layout Button.........................................................................................................22 Write KML Button..........................................................................................................23 Conclusion..................................................................................................................... .........24 3 NEW RESIDENTIAL HURRICANE LOSS MODEL..........................................................31 Introduction................................................................................................................... ..........31 Hurricane Loss Model........................................................................................................... .33 Housing Trends Study.....................................................................................................34 Statistical Model of Hurricane.........................................................................................35 Damage Survey Study............................................................................................................36 Updated and Improved Hurricane Loss Model......................................................................37 New Roof Layout............................................................................................................37 New Truss Layout...........................................................................................................39 Model Calibration and Verification.................................................................................41 Model Consolidation.......................................................................................................43 Menu Creation.................................................................................................................45 Conclusion..................................................................................................................... .........48

PAGE 6

6 4 DEVELOPMENT OF COMMERCIAL HURRICANE LOSS MODEL..............................57 Introduction................................................................................................................... ..........57 Effects of Wind on Mu lti-Story Buildings.............................................................................59 Debris Impact..................................................................................................................59 Water Intrusion................................................................................................................60 Faade Damage...............................................................................................................61 Fundamentals of Developing the Hurricane Loss Model.......................................................62 Modeling Debris Impact..................................................................................................62 Modeling Vulnerable Cladding.......................................................................................66 Modeling Methodology...................................................................................................70 Conclusion..................................................................................................................... .........74 5 CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................... ..81 Hurricane Damage Mitigation................................................................................................81 Chase software................................................................................................................. .......81 Computational Model of Structural Vulnerability to Hurricane Winds.................................82 APPENDIX CHASE TUTORIAL..............................................................................................................84 Example 1...................................................................................................................... .........84 Storm Path Spreadsheet File............................................................................................84 Initiating Chase Program.................................................................................................84 Loading Hurricane Track................................................................................................85 Loading Deployment Layout...........................................................................................85 Creating KML File..........................................................................................................86 Loading KML File...........................................................................................................86 Example 2...................................................................................................................... .........87 Loading Hurricane Jeanne Track.....................................................................................87 Blue Tarp Deployment....................................................................................................88 Red Rover Deployment...................................................................................................88 Deployment Integration...................................................................................................88 LIST OF REFERENCES............................................................................................................. ..96 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.........................................................................................................98

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF TABLES Table page 3-1 Model Calibration Points...................................................................................................50 3-2 Input Variables to Consolidated Damage Model...............................................................50

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 2-1 Florida Coastal Monitoring Program Instrumentation Tower..........................................26 2-2 Red Rover Deployment in Google Earth..........................................................................26 2-3 Cannonball Run Deployment in Google Earth.................................................................27 2-4 Ground Zero Deployment in Google Earth......................................................................27 2-5 Blue Tarp Deployment in Google Earth...........................................................................28 2-6 Multiple Proposed Deployments in Google Earth............................................................28 2-7 Main Chase GUI Window................................................................................................29 2-8 Load Track Process Output...............................................................................................29 2-9 Load Layout process....................................................................................................... ..30 3-1 Flow Chart of Florida Hurricane Loss Model...................................................................51 3-2 Diagram of Typical Residential Home & Components....................................................51 3-3 Typical Sheathing Panel Pattern.......................................................................................52 3-4 Wind Load Cases........................................................................................................... ...52 3-5 Original Truss Vulnerability Curve..................................................................................53 3-6 Typical Truss Layouts..................................................................................................... ..54 3-7 Comparison of Original and New Truss Vulnerability Curves........................................54 3-8 Comparison of Vulnerability Curves to Damage Survey Points and Best-Fit Curve.......55 3-9 Comparison of Weak and Strong Models, Old a nd New Building Code Damage Survey Data Points.............................................................................................................56 3-10 Example Input File for File Menu....................................................................................56 4-1 EIFS-clad Building Damaged by Frances and Jeanne, Satellite Beach, Florida..............79 4-3 Flow Chart for Commercial Hurri cane Loss Model Debris Impact Model......................80 A-1 Projected Path Spreadsheet................................................................................................89

PAGE 9

9 A-2 Chase Root Directory....................................................................................................... ..89 A-3 Initial Chase GUI Window................................................................................................90 A-4 Loaded Hurricane Track....................................................................................................90 A-5 Loaded Deployment Layout..............................................................................................91 A-6 Written KML File........................................................................................................... ...91 A-7 Chase Root Directory after Completion............................................................................92 A-8 Loaded KML in Google Earth...........................................................................................92 A-9 Info Box of Selected Tower...............................................................................................93 A-10 Google Earth Close-up of FCMP Tower...........................................................................93 A-11 Completed Blue Tarp Process and Chase GUI..................................................................94 A-12 Completed Red Rover Process and Chase GUI.................................................................94 A-13 Google Earth Screenshot of Mixed Deployment...............................................................95

PAGE 10

10 Abstract of Dissertation Pres ented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Engineering HURRICANE DAMAGE MITIGATION: FIELD DEPLOYMENT STRATEGIES AND RESIDENTIAL-VULNERABILITY MODELING By Felix F. Rodriguez May 2007 Chair: Kurt Gurley Major: Civil Engineering This document discusses various contributions to research in hurricane damage mitigation. A graphical user interface was cr eated to assist the Florida Coastal Monitoring Program in the deployment of wind observation towers deployed during the landfall of a hurricane. The program calculates geo-positional coordi nates of observation towers based upon terrain properties and storm characteristics. An updated Florida Hurric ane Loss Model was created that re-defined a load path analysis, and improved the program usability and automation. The improvements included a model consolidation in to one damage model routine, and introduced menu functions. A literature review of commercial building dama ge estimation provided information on assessing damage on multi-story buildings in creating a commercial Florida Hurricane Loss Model. A methodology was devised that would consider the damage energy of debris for impact modeling, and the vulnerability of common cladding material s such as exterior insulation finish systems and glass.

PAGE 11

11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Hurricane Damage Mitigation: Hurricanes are of great concern in the Southeast United States, causing an incredible amount of de struction, necessitating immense preparation. Understanding the interaction of extreme winds and structures can help find cost effective mitigation solutions and minimize loss of life a nd property. The challenge in understanding wind / structure interaction is the large degree of un certainty in both the loading and the structural response and capacity. The engineer must rely on statistics to estimate probabilities and expectations of events occurring. It is the goal of the Florida Coastal Monito ring Program (FCMP) to address the issue of mitigating wind damage to residential housing by providing field data on th e behavior of winds and wind loading. The data are obtained from installing instrumenta tion towers near the intersection of the storms path a nd the coastline. The type of in formation that can be extracted from these towers depends upon how they are arranged relative to each other and the hurricane. A program that calculates the coordinates of a proposed formation will faci litate the FCMP team in deploying towers quickly and precisely. The program is simple to understand and use and provides visual assistance to the te am in its deployment operations. Another aspect of hurricane mitigation that FCMP is active with involves modeling and estimating damage of residential homes from hurricane winds. The original Florida Hurricane Loss Model (FHLM) program was constructed as a Monte Carlo simulation program that simulates random loads and component strengths and records the instances of failure. Many changes and revisions have been made to the or iginal code, transforming the program into one that provides more realistic results and improve organization. New roof loading, sheathing panel failure and truss connection failure methods were created to repla ce the original algorithms. The

PAGE 12

12 program was also in need of consolidation, whic h motivated the creation of one file capable of harnessing the entire simulation pr ocess for all models. Finally, addi tional features were added to assist the user in inputting information in an efficient manner. These features are capable of instructing simulation runs to minimize user supervision. Collectively, the new additions make the physical damage component of the hurricane loss prediction model more accurate, efficient, and primed for expansion to commercial applications. Recently, FCMP has been assigned to devel op a damage estimation model for commercial structures similar to the residential model. Diffe rences in residential ve rsus commercial require the development of an entirely new model. Prel iminary work has been done to initiate this process. A literature review of information pe rtinent to high-rise construction and the main components that are subject to wind damage ha s also been included in this document. The information gathered is assembled to provide a method to identify the threshold of damage and quantify the probabilistic st rength of components.

PAGE 13

13 CHAPTER 2 CHASE: TOWER DEPLOYMENT SOFTWARE Introduction The main objective of research efforts has been to understand the behavior of hurricane winds as they interact with land and the built in frastructure. These massive storms threaten life and property, and particularly any storm of Ca tegory 3 or stronger can generate billions of dollars in losses. It is known that a positive correlation exists between wind speed and the quantity of damage caused by a storm. An accurate calibration of wind to damage is a complicated process that presents many difficulti es. This chapter discusses efforts to quantify this hurricane wind behavior, in particular th e speed, turbulence and direction of winds over land. The Florida Coastal Monitoring Program (FCMP) is an effort to measure and model wind behavior during storm landfall. During a storm, FCMP teams deploy wind observation towers in key locations that will assist meteorologists, engineers and scientists in determining wind intensity. Much information has been derived from this data collection program. The data is used for the calculation of various statis tical and stochastic parameters used to define wind behavior, including the cross-correlation, auto-spectrum, a nd turbulence length scales. These parameters are used to better understand the behavior of th e wind during the passing of a hurricane. This information is also used to estimate dynamic wi nd pressures on structures, a major consideration in the design of buildings and other stru ctures along the coastal United States. The goal of FCMP has been to position the to wers as close to the location of maximum windspeed as possible. Currently, the locations fo r deployment of the five towers are determined within several hours before landfall, based on th e current predicted path of the storm. The

PAGE 14

14 placement of the towers relative to the shoreline, populated areas, and each other depends upon the impact region and storm characteristics as it approaches. Every storm results in a different arrangement of the towers, reflecting the specific parameters of that event. However, there were no previous formalized procedures or tools that allow the teams to investigate multiple deployment strategies. This chapter presents an interactive tool that was developed to allow the FCMP deployment crews to investigate multiple deploy ment scenarios. With the advent of Google Earth (GE), it has become very easy to visualize not just the path of the hurricane, but also the characteristics of the terrain, th e population densities in its path, and other parameters that can influence the decision that an FCMP team makes regarding tower placement. The creation of this tool allows a flexible deployment strategy th at can be adapted to continuously-changing conditions. The benefit is greater control of the experiment, and an improved opportunity to learn more per event. Tower Deployment Interactive Tool There would be many benefits of using an inte ractive tool to assist the tower deployment design. It allows a visualization of a proposed deployment layout, which will help the team determine the optimal position of a deployed tower. It could allow the team to locate an open patch of land near the proposed location, which would eliminate crucial time and resources spent in search of a satisfactory position. Figure 21 provides an example of what a satisfactory position for a tower would be. Notice that the terrai n is open, and the towe r is located far from any wind obstructions, such as buildings, large trees, etc. Another benefit of having an interactive tool is that it facilita tes comparing different proposed deployments. Being able to visualize multiple potential deployment layouts side by

PAGE 15

15 side allows FCMP to determine which tower de ployment layout would be most favorable for the given approaching storm and existing safe operational window of time. Thus far the visualization tool has incorporated four basic deployment strategies that have been used in previous deployments. These are referred to as Red Rover, Cannonball Run, Ground Zero, and Blue Tarp. These st rategies are discussed next. Ho wever, the visualization tool is designed to incorporate other strategies as the FCMP teams devel op them. In each of the strategies described below, the user has the ability to change many parameters, from storm path, size and speed, to the desired spacing between towers. The interactive capabilities will be discussed after the four basic de ployment options are discussed. Red Rover Deployment Strategy Red Rover is a layout in which the towers are set up perpendicular to the projected path of the hurricane. This is advantageous when the path of the storm is unclear, or when no significant infrastructure is farther inland. The concept is to spread the instrumenta tion over a large area to maximize the possibility of capturing extreme winds from at least one instrument. Typically the idea is to deploy this layout fair ly close to shore, as the wind sp eeds vary greatly along the coast during landfall. Figure 2-2 provides a GE scr eenshot of a typical Red Rover deployment. Cannonball Run Deployment Strategy Cannonball Run is a strategy designed to answ er questions about the storm rate of deterioration after landfall. As a storm makes landfall, the wind speeds in general decay as the storm begins to lose strength and the ground level winds are hinde red by terrain. The maps used to determine design windspeeds in ASCE 7 incor porate this concept via contours of decreasing design wind speed. This deployment will help qu antify, calibrate and verify this concept. The towers are to be placed al ong the projected path of the st orm, starting at the coast and moving inland many miles. For this deployment stra tegy to work successfully, it is necessary that

PAGE 16

16 the storms path be well defined. This is crucial b ecause deploying towers in a line parallel to the path will result in a hit or miss situation, providing low chan ce of obtaining extreme wind data if the path is not well defined. In land terrain features are an impor tant consideration, as the ideal placement for any given tower is in a locally ope n exposure. Data from towers in open exposure are more readily extrapolated to a larger area, as the data is not polluted by the effects of very nearby objects. See Figure 2-3 for a GE repr esentation of the Cannonball Run deployment. Ground Zero Deployment Strategy In some cases it may be desirable to cluste r the towers in a circle around an area where the maximum winds are expected. The presence of a group of towers in a small area helps to quantify the difference in wind over small area du e to both storm features and local terrain effects. Post damage investigations of dama ge from hurricane winds show that significant changes in damage intensity can take place over relatively small areas, particularly near the center of the path of the stor m. Essentially, the Ground Zero st rategy is useful for understanding local wind effects that produ ce these observed differences. This deployment strategy is useful when the path of the storm is we ll-defined, to capture a point, hopefully, at or near th e band of maximum winds. It is also more desirable when the hurricane has a large eyewall and is very intens e. Refer to Figure 2-4 for an example of the Ground Zero deployment. The optimal deployment has towers on both the strong and weak sides of the storm (in the figure, north and south of the westward moving eyewall, respectively). Blue Tarp Deployment Strategy The fourth and last tower deployment layou t involves one similar to the Ground Zero layout, but differs in that the location of the clus ter of towers is determined by the placement of the FCMPs instrumented houses. These houses are collecting the dynamic wind pressure on the roof. The towers provide the approach wind field that produces those wind loads. This layout is

PAGE 17

17 most useful when the storm is expected to pass through a well built-up subu rban region near the coastline. The information obtained from the towers in this setting can be combined with the data measured from the instrumented houses to corre late wind speed with pr essure on the roofs of oneand two-story residential homes. See Figure 2-5 for an example of a Blue Tarp layout. Chase Software Appendix A provides a detailed walk-through of the use of Chase software. The next section discusses the basic inpu ts and operations of Chase. The Chase program will help facilitate the tower deployment process by calculating possible deployment layouts based on user input. It is used to compare and contrast between different layouts, and determine the optimal placeme nts in each scenario. In the future, a layer of terrain exposure information could be combined with aerial photographs and the projected storm path to determine a specific location for each tower. This information is quite feasible to obtain with the help of GIS technology software. This process can be indispensable to th e entire tower deployment operation, saving valuable time and resources in the period before storm landfall. The teams instructed to deploy towers would not need to search around for a satisfactory spot, and instead can rely on the information provided by the aeri al photographs to identify suitable patches of land. The operation could be capable of on-the-fly cha nges in deployment plan based upon an evolving storm behavior. This is crucia l to improving FCMPs tower depl oyment strategies, because the optimal strategy can change contin uously over the span of a coupl e of house before landfall. The process would end in the determination of a se t of GPS coordinates that would represent the positions of the deployed towers. The Chase program can also be used by part ner researchers such as NOAA atmospheric scientists to help determine which deployment strategy would be most useful. The program is

PAGE 18

18 simple enough so that an official engineer, student or layman would not be confused in its mechanics. This is achieved by a stratification of various input variables, and organization of the entire process into three eas y steps. The program produces an output a file containing information that, together with visualization of ex isting terrain exposure and aerial photographs, could be displayed to anyone instantaneously with an interface such as Google Earth. The Chase program is a graphical user in terface (GUI) written in MATLAB, and compiled so that it may stand alone as an executable progr am. It is designed so that the necessary inputs can be easily obtained. The process, split into three steps, can be initiated by pressing buttons for each one. The program ultimately calculates th e GPS coordinates of each tower placement according to the values of the input variables chosen. This was achieved by use of the mapping toolbox, a library of sub-functions that manipulat e and work with distances on the surface of the earth. On the surface of the earth, straight lines in the plane become arcs with the center coinciding with the Earths. A two-dimensional coor dinate set in this context refers to longitude and latitude. Distances are thus calculated along this arc, el iminating the need for survey measurement on the eve of hurricane landfall. The output of the program is a KML file that may be input into Google Earth (GE). Google Earth is quickly becoming a popular tool for lo cating landmarks around the world. This output in KML format can literally be dragged and dropped into the GE interface, and will be visualized instantaneously. This makes the tower deploym ent viewable to FCMP deployment teams. The KML file contains information about the st orms projected path, a path offset from the eyewall representing the radius to maximum wind s (eyewall radius), a nd the locations of the proposed towers. It is possible for the us er to input various proposed tower layouts

PAGE 19

19 simultaneously in GE, prior to choosing the desire d layout. Figure 2-6 displays a GE screenshot of multiple tower deployments viewed simultaneously. Chase Methodology The programs input variables are dependent up on the characteristics of the hurricane and the desired layout geometry. It re quires an Excel file containing the projected path, downloaded from the National Hurricane Center path proj ections. These files are updated every six hours prior to land fall. Three buttons trigger main r outines which encompass the entire layout design process. The optimal deployment strategy is a functi on of storm behavior and the area to be impacted. From characteristics such as transla tion speed, size and intensity, we determine if the path is well defined, and thus which strategies would be best to deploy. Depending on the terrain characteristics and nearby infrastructure, we furt her determine which deployment layout to use, what tower cluster spacing is feasible, and wh at inland distance we would like to deploy the towers at. Input Variables Refer to Figure 2-7 for a screenshot of the Chase GUI window. The first set of variables to initiate the Chase program is the hurricane name and season. Together, they will instruct Chase to look for an Excel file containing the projected path of the storm. The projected path will be input and combined with the stat e chosen to locate the projected path as it inters ects the coast and makes landfall. If a state is chosen whose boundary does not in tersect the projected path, an error will display on the text window. With a storm track and state chosen, the user is then able to select the general layout geometry for deployment. The choices are th e four layouts proposed Red Rover, Cannonball

PAGE 20

20 Run, Ground Zero and Blue Tarp. Ba sed upon the next set of input variables, the layout details will be selected, and the deployment layout will be created. Another input crucial for optimal tower deployment will be the radius to maximum winds and the inland distance. The radi us of maximum winds can be obtained from an independent source (NOAA), and input into Chase to establish a path offset from the eyewall center. Figures 2-2 through 2-6 represent this as a colored swath for the storm path. The inland distance input represents the center of the tower deployment along the radius to maximum winds path. With the center point of the tower cluster calculated, the set of coordinate s for the towers can be obtained. The input to the deployment layout also include s the number of towers to be used. This can be any number from one to six. The tower clus ter distance will be another input, and can be edited by direct typing into the va lue box, or can be incremented us ing the plus or minus buttons. The value of increment (or decrement) is 0.25 di stance units, depending upon the units chosen. If the deployment strategy is Red Rover or Cannonball Run, this tower cluster distance is literally the distance between adjacent to wers. For Ground Zero, the tower cluster distance will be the radius of the circle the towers will be pos itioned around. The cluster center coordinates is irrelevant to the Blue Tarp strategy, because it is one which does not place the towers in any set arrangement. The Units Multiplier box eliminates the users need to resort to some universal unit. One can choose which unit of distance is most convenient in figuring out the inland distance, radius to maximum winds and tower cluster distance. By default, the choice of units will be set to statute miles, but the Chase software is capable of calculating distances in terms of nautical miles and kilometers. A radio box on the GUI window se lects the units desired for determining the

PAGE 21

21 layout geometry. Internally, this will assign a value to the Un its Multiplier variable, which converts all distances to be i nputted into statute miles. The Longitude and Latitude edit boxes are used with the Blue Tarp setting to append the list of individual tower coordina tes. Since the Blue Tarp strategy is a method for deploying individual towers in no precise arrangement, th ey must be inputted one at a time. Once the coordinates have been typed, the Update Next button will append the list. If a mistake was made, clicking on the Erase Last button will erase the last tower inputted. No tice that as the list is appended, the value in the Number of Towers box is adjusted accordingly. The Tower Locations box provides a list of the GPS coordinates for the set of towers that make up the deployment strategy. This is relevant to all deployment strategies, but only in the Blue Tarp can this list be cha nged. Verifying the information in this box is the last step to creating the KML file. Some other buttons on the GUI window are not input windows but serve miscellaneous functions. At some point during the design proc ess, a value may pop up in the Landfall Heading box, and also in the Tangent Heading box. These values help the user understand what direction the storm will be going after it makes landfall. The Zoom Slider help s the user view the deployment layout father out or closer in. A me ssage window helps the us er stay aware of the status of the deployment design pr ocess. It will make the user aw are that any of the three main routines carried out successfully, or it could warn the user that an i nput variable needs to be addressed to proceed. Load Track Button Once the hurricane name and season have been identified, and the state has been chosen from the pull-down menu, clicking on the Load Track button will provide the user with a map of the Southeastern area of the United States and the storm projected path.

PAGE 22

22 The Load Track process involves retrieving the input necessary to begin the tower deployment process. The boundaries of the states are vectorized into longitude and latitude vectors. A user-created Excel file containing the path is located, and is compiled into the MATLAB environment. The projecte d landfall point will be defined as the intersection point of these two sets of coordinates, and is calculated using sub-functions in MATLAB contained in the mapping toolbox. Next, the landfall heading is calculated using another mapping sub-function. The routine calculate s the azimuth based upon two sets of lo ngitude and latitude. The result is displayed in the Landfall Heading box. The value is taken to the clockwise angle of rotation from the north direction. Usually, for a storm intersec ting the Florida coast, the landfall heading will be somewhere 270 and 360 degrees. Finally, the results are plotted. The user wi ll see a map of the state boundary and the storms projected path. Refer to Figure 2-8 for a screenshot of a loaded track using Chase. Load Layout Button When the Load Layout button is pressed, a rou tine will be triggered to provide the user with a visual representa tion of the proposed tower layout. The process will retrieve the values in the Radius to Maximum Winds box, the Inland Di stance box, the Number of Towers box and the Cluster Distance box for calculation of the tower deployments coordinates. First, an offset path is calculated to de termine the Radius to Maximum Winds path. The original projected path, represen ting the path of the eyewall ce nter, consists of two vectors representing longitude and latitude coordinates. Each component in these vectors is paired with the same component in the second vector to pr ovide a coordinate on Earth. The tangent heading of each coordinate is calculated using a central difference method. From this, the perpendicular heading is calculated, which is be 90 degrees co unter-clockwise from the tangent heading of the direction the storm is going. If the storm is headi ng in the northwest direction, this offset path

PAGE 23

23 will be north and east of the projected path. The offset path is drawn a distance away from the storm path a distance equal to the radius of maximum winds. Next, a point is located on this path which is determined from the inland distance. That point will become the center of the tower cluste r, and the locations of the towers will be determined from this center point. The tangent he ading of the storm path is calculated at the center point, along with its perpendicular heading. This will be used to figure out the towers positioning. The calculated coordinates of the to wers will be stored in two vectors, one containing longitude and the second latitude values. If the user calls for a Blue Tarp deployme nt, the Radius of Maximum Winds path and cluster center will be defined. However, the vector s containing the towers longitude and latitude will be explicitly defined by the user. The last step of the Load Layout process is to display the locati on of the towers. The Radius to Maximum Winds path will be displayed in red ove r the state contour and storm projected path, as well as the towers in their de termined locations. The center of the tower cluster will be indicated by a blue circle, and the locations of the towers in will be indicated by green stars. Refer to Figure 9 for an example of a loaded layout. Write KML Button The final routine of the Chase software prepar es and creates a KML file so that the user may visualize the deployment in Google Earth. A KM L file is text file saved in a KML extension containing ASCII information that GE reads and interprets. The file de fines objects such as polygons and place marks within a folder structure. These objects contain many attributes such as a location on the Earth via GPS coordinates, name tags, look-at information and an object description. The look-at informati on provides a tilt and heading that the camera (user view point)

PAGE 24

24 will adjust to when the object is selected. Tag information is provi ded to help the user understand what an object represents, and is avai lable when that object is selected. Information obtained from the GUI window is retained during this routine to create a unique file for each deployment designed. The file name is created from the hurricanes name, season and deployment layout. Completed text c onsists of tower information with polygon representation, eyewall cen ter path information, and radius to maximum winds path information. Tower information is organized into a folder, one for each tower in the deployment layout. Each tower is created as an object, with accompanying nametag information, look-at information, and a corresponding list of polygons that put together represent the tower itself. The polygons are created in three dimensions and scaled down to an appropriate scale. Each towers polygon group is contained in a separate subfolder. The storm path information is defined in a se parate folder as an open polygon so that the user may visualize the projected path of the st orm. The path is outlined in bold black and extruded to perceive height. Th e path is labeled to identify the path from farther out. The radius to maximum winds pa th is created in a third folder, which contains the offset path of the expected maximum winds in the hurri cane. This path is indicated in red, and will usually be seen northeast of the storm path. Conclusion A program has been created to help FCMP t eams make their tower deployment decisions based on all relevant information. A user-frie ndly MATLAB GUI provides FCMP staff with an opportunity to make an easy tr ansition between the projected storm path to a set of GPS coordinates of proposed tower locations. The progra m presents this information in the form of a KML text file which is readable by Google Earth so that anyone with an Internet connection can

PAGE 25

25 be aware of tower deployment plans. Ultimatel y, Chase can improve how FCMP teams use their resources and optimize the collect ion of perishable data under high-pressure circumstances. There are several improvements possible to improve Chase. The program can be designed to input translation speeds from the proj ected path to provide an estimated time of landfall. This may be helpful in providing FCMP a timeframe of when deployments should be completed. It should also be updated to incorporat e land use information to better select specific tower locations in open terrain. Chase can also be set up to customize the towers order in deployment, so that the tower number presente d in GE will correspond to the tower number deployed at that location. The KM L file can also be updated to provide a link to the towers 15minute update files on FCMPs website. A tutorial of the Chase software in the form of examples may be found in Appendix A for insight into the program procedure.

PAGE 26

26 Figure 2-1. Florida Coastal Monitori ng Program Instrumentation Tower. Figure 2-2. Red Rover Deployment in Google Earth.

PAGE 27

27 Figure 2-3. Cannonball Run Deployment in Google Earth. Figure 2-4. Ground Zero De ployment in Google Earth.

PAGE 28

28 Figure 2-5. Blue Tarp Deployment in Google Earth. Figure 2-6. Multiple Proposed Deployments in Google Earth.

PAGE 29

29 Figure 2-7. Main Chase GUI Window. Figure 2-8. Load Track Process Output.

PAGE 30

30 Figure 2-9. Load Layout process

PAGE 31

31 CHAPTER 3 NEW RESIDENTIAL HURRICANE LOSS MODEL Introduction Improving the resistance of residential housing to hurricane winds is driven in part by the financial impact of such improvements. Pr operty insurance rates are based upon predicted insured losses, and improvements to design need to be cost-effective to be accepted. The ability to predict both the phys ical and financial vulnerability of housing to winds has been improving in the last decade as the pred ictive models have grown more sophisticated in their use of engineering principles and obser ved data. This chapter addre sses modeling (predicting) the physical damage to residential homes to hurrican e winds. A structural vulnerability model was developed at UF as a component in the Flor ida Hurricane Loss Model (FHLM) by Dr. Anne Cope (Cope, 2004). This model has recently been revised to incorporate additional information on load paths, and to make the architecture more user friendly and adaptable to the rapid influx of additional field data with each hurricane land fall. The progressive failure that a home can experience is a process that begi ns at the top of the structure, and ends at the founda tion. A typical residential home is constructed with a concrete slab foundation, and wood or masonry walls wh ich harness the building roof trusses and covering. The covering is made up of plywood sheathing, a water resist ant layer, and shingles or tiles. The roof layout geomet ry may be gable end, hip, or some combination. The wind flow pattern depending on the directio n of the storm, determines the roof and wall pressure. The component feeling the most ex treme pressure is typically the roof along the corners and edges where uplift is strong. A roof can be made up of asphalt shingles, which are flat on the roof, or they can be made of flat or curved ceramic tiles. Numerous documented

PAGE 32

32 damage investigations indicate th at the roof cover is among the most vulnerable component of a home, frequently torn from the roof and becoming air-borne. Simultaneously, the sheathing panels below th e shingles are subjected to uplift. These panels can also come off, exposing the trusses underneath and permitting water intrusion. Without the sheathing, the trusse s are vulnerable to toppling. The loads on the roof are transferred to the walls via the roof to wall connections, which range from nails in older construction to clips and straps designed to resist hurricane loads in modern construction. The failure of roof to wall connections can have significant impact on the resistance of the home against winds. The windows and openings around the house beco me vulnerable to the windborne debris created by roof cover and vegetation, increasi ng the probability of breaching a home. If a window or door is penetrated, the inside of the house is subject to water intrusion and internal pressurization, and the home is now experi encing a more vulnerable load scenario. Each of the components described above (roof cover, sheathing, roof to wall connections, walls, and windows and openings) can vary in their cap acity or ability to resist wind loads. This is dependent upon the construction practice comm on at the time the home was built, the quality of construction, the building codes enforced at the time, the effects of aging of structural materials, fasteners and connections, and the lo ad sharing among component s. It is not possible to precisely quantify each of thes e issues for any given home, thus it has been common practice to model the vulnerability of residential stru ctures in a probabilistic format. Random capacity values are sampled from an appropriate distri bution for a given component, and compared to randomly assigned loading sampled from a distri bution that represents the loading. A Monte

PAGE 33

33 Carlo simulation is then used to produce a statis tical assessment of the likelihood of the quantity of damage to various components to a se ries of wind speeds and wind directions. Several such models already exist, including one created at UF by Dr. Anne Cope during her Ph.D. research program. This chapter discusses upgrades that have been made to her original model. Hurricane Loss Model The model created at UF to predict dama ge on a residence is known as the physical damage component of the Florida Hurricane Loss Model (FHLM). In addition to the physical damage model developed at UF, the FHLM also includes a wind field prediction component, an internal damage component, and a financial and actuarial component developed by partnering researchers. The relation between damage and windspeed is an output to the physical damage model, and is referred to as the vulne rability curve that is, damage versus windspeed. These curves vary based upon the construction of the house being modeled (wall type, roof cover type and age, roof to wall connections, the nailing in the shea thing, the use of shutters on windows, etc.) The Hurricane Loss Model is an example of a Monte Carlo simulation, useful for tracking phenomenon with many random variables. Fo r complex systems w ith many interacting components, it is typically not possible to de rive a closed-form solution relating expected outcome as a function of the i nput variables. Monte Carlo simulation is practical when the interaction between the many vari ables are non-linear, or if they are described in terms of nonnormal distributions. The advent of computers has also driven the popularity of this method. A flow chart of the program developed by Dr. Cope can be seen in Figure 3-1. The fundamental concept is to apply a specified 3second gust wind speed to the model home. This 3second gust represents the peak value experienced by the house for a given storm or period of

PAGE 34

34 time (e.g. one year). The loads from this gust are determined and applied to the structures. Each of the components of the structure has a load capacity assigned to it (each shingle, each window, each sheathing panel, etc.), which is compar ed to the wind load. Those components whose capacity is exceeded by the load are then damage d. The process is repeated many times, with a new set of capacities randomly assigned to each new model. After many simulations the output is a statistical description of the vulnerability of that model ho me to that wind speed from that direction. The process is comple ted for eight different wind dire ctions at each wind speed, and includes wind speeds every 5 mph from 50 to 250 mph gusts. Figure 3-2 provides a diagram of all components in a typical residential home considered for damage (Cope, 2004). Ultimately the output provides the probability of component failure conditioned upon wind speed and wind direction. The wind field modelin g group then provides the probability of these various wind speeds occurring. A given house model can be varied in many ways to reflect the differing methods of construction. For example, very weak stapled roof sheathing as well as very resistant nailed sheathing using modern practic e are both options for the model. Unprotected windows and protected (shuttered) windows can be modeled. Different uplift roof loading is provided for hip and gable roofs. Housing Trends Study Prior to the development of the original mode l, a study of the construction methods of the state of Florida provided information to make assumptions about the model. Many counties throughout Florida provided detailed and t horough information about the structural characteristics of homes through a database. Th e study was used to determine, for example, typical square footage of residential housing. A building component study was undertaken to as ses the strength variability of many parts composing the fabrication of a house. Sources of in formation include literatu re relating results of

PAGE 35

35 laboratory testing, literature fr om existing vulnerability mode ls such as the FEMA HAZUS hurricane model, information from damage studies and manufacturers information (e.g. roof to wall connection capacities provided by Simpson St rong Tie, garage door pressure ratings, etc). Statistical Model of Hurricane A list of model parameters determine the diffe rent permutations of models, such as the house location (e.g., North, Central Florida), wall ma terial (wood frame or concrete block), roof type (hip or gable roof), roof to wall connection type (nails clips, straps), window size, distribution and protection, and the number of stories. Identification of failure has its roots in reliabili ty theory; that is, the probability of failure may be expressed in terms of the loads and re sistances of the system under consideration: ) 0 ( ) ( L R P failure P MATLAB synthesizes random va lues using a random number generator, which is capable of producing random numbers that fit a section of many common distributions (uniform, Gau ssian, lognormal, etc.). Loads simulated in the Model are based upon guidelines from ASCE-7. Pressure coefficients are factors used to relate the measured mechanical pressure on a surface to the velocity pressure: 2 02 1v p p Cp (Simiu, 1996). The pressure is calculated at mean roof height with unit surface roughn ess. Different pressure coefficients are used to distinguish different zones around a house exhib iting unique flow patterns: inte rior, edge and corner roof zones; interior and edge wall z one; and windward, leeward and side wall zones. All these factors taken from ASCE-7 are assumed the mean coeffi cient values, and the COV is assumed to be 10%. The topography and direction factors are assumed to be unity for the residential model. Losses identified in the m odel are conducted by tracking forces down to the ground. Failure checks commence on the roof, and as th e roof cover and sheathi ng panels are lost, it

PAGE 36

36 affects the truss performance and connection upli ft. Because these calculations will be done at least once per simulation, and assuming there will be thousands of simulations, the computation speed of these operations becomes very important. After the set of calculations to determine all failure is completed, the percentage of loss for each component is compiled into a saved file for further analysis. The model outputs the archives for each windspeed and direction increment. Damage Survey Study The occurrence of new observable wind damage data is an important aspect of model calibration and validation. A survey was conduc ted to assess the eff ectiveness of the 2002 Florida Building Code. This survey was motivated by the 2004 hurricane season, in which four hurricanes (Charley, Frances, Ivan, Jeanne) crea ted observable damage to Florida residential infrastructure. Homes affected by these storms were inve stigated. Information was organized by GIS technology to create wind swath maps, reporting the highest windsp eed experienced in an area. The regions were stratified to classify homes and their locations. Randomly selected homeowners for each region were called to authori ze our inspection. It included an interview that gathered information about homeowner evacuati on procedures and the amount of damage that occurred. The surroundings were observed and noted. The information provided modelers with the opportunity to verify the vulnerability of homes due to the storms predicted by modeli ng. The models report expected damage at a particular windspeed. Statistics obtained from insp ections help in calibration of the resistances of windows, doors, garages, and roof covers (i.e., ti les or shingles). The points created could be used to reinforce or update the results that were produced by the FHLM.

PAGE 37

37 Updated and Improved Hurricane Loss Model Since the development of the FHLM (Cope, 2004), additional improvements to simulation have been considered. These additions are due to an evolution of the thought process in the model, by a need for a more user-friendly and eas ily adaptable architecture for the program, and the need to incorporate additional data on hous ing performances collected during the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons. The improvements made to the model can be fit into three categories: Load path and capacity upgrades; Improved architecture to streamline use a nd further development of the program; The creation of a manageable user interface. The finished product is one that will facilitate the user in many aspects of the simulation process, including managing the various input va riables that go into th e program, cataloguing the various simulation runs, and conducting sensitivity studies. The rest of this chapter describes the update s made to the UF physical damage component of the FHLM. New Roof Layout The updates commenced with a refinement of the roof layout and geometry. Overall dimensions of the roof were verified and comp ared to the original roof layout. These were determined based upon house dimensions, a 2-ft overh ang, and a 5-on-12 roof pitch. The overall roof area was found to be inconsis tent with the original sheathi ng area matrix. A flattened roof was drawn in AutoCAD, and a sheathing panel layout was created. The staggered panel pattern drawn is characteristic of residential home c onstruction, and can be seen in Figure 3-3. The area of each sheathing pane l was obtained in AutoCAD, and a sheathing area matrix was created for implementation in to MATLAB. Each entry in the matrix represents the area of

PAGE 38

38 one sheathing panel on the roof. Panels in the corn er, typically cut smaller to fit on the roof, will have less tributary area. The process continued with a verification of the pressure coefficients for the original roof layout. The load cases used to model wind flow from different directions were adapted from ASCE 7. In the original model, there was no dist inction between edge and corner pressure zones. In reality, corners will experience more uplift than between corners along the edge. There was a possibility that FHLM was undere stimating the roofcover failure. This loading also affects the sheathing failure and roof-t o-wall connection failure. A new process incorporated three pressure z ones for modeling interi or, edge, and corner zones. To model 8 possible load cases where wind is directed at 0 to 360 degrees in 45-degree increments relative to the house, three load cases were created: winds perpendicular to the ridgeline; winds parallel to the ridgeline; wind cornering the ridgeline at an oblique angle. For each of these three load cases, the edge zone distance was calculated, based upon recommendations from ASCE 7 and dependent on the roofs dimensions. Each load case was drawn up in AutoCAD over the existing sheathing panel layout. The reader may refer to Figure 3-4 for a schematic of the wind load cases on both gable and hip roofs. The entire roof was then broken down into three areas, and it was observed that some panels lay in one, two, or even all three pressure zones simult aneously. The overlapping of the pressure zones with the panel layout made easy th e process of determining the overall pressure on any panel. The pressure coefficients attr ibuted to each sheathi ng panel became a weight coefficient based upon its contribution by area from each zone. Finally, an interpolated pressure coefficient was calculated for each sheathing panel.

PAGE 39

39 Results of using this new roof layout were co mpared to the original models results. It appeared there wasnt much difference between the two, because as ASCE 7 recommends that the corner and edge zones remain equal, the means and COVs for the edge and corner zones were set equal in the new FHLM. However, th e program is now capable of assuming a higher corner zone pressure coefficien t. The results from new wind t unnel studies of wind pressures on housing can be easily incorporated. New Truss Layout The original truss failure analysis relied upon the sheathing panel load analysis to direct the uplift damage to connections. As a sheathing pa nel failed, the pressure on it was set to zero, and therefore would relieve some uplift pressure on a truss whose tribut ary area coincides with that panel. Thus, the failure of a 4-foot by 8-foot panel could affect as much as 4 trusses when spaced at 24 inches. As all trusses are checked for failure (at the wall connection), almost every sheathing panel pressure would have been acc ounted for four times. The tedious process motivated the introduction of a more efficient routine, perhaps curbi ng the lengthy process of checking every relevant sheathing panel for every truss. Failure of the roof-to-wall c onnections in the model coul d be categorized into two mechanisms, uplift failure or t oppling. Uplift is a function of the amount loading on sheathing panels attached to the truss. Toppling is identified when a sign ificant amount of sheathing panels have been pulled from the truss, leaving it to st and free in the wind without lateral resistance. The vulnerability curve of the truss failure s was examined, and revealed there was a modeling issue in the routine. At a certain velocity, usually pa st 150 mph, the failure of the trusses did not increase with increasing velocity but actually decreased. As sheathing panels were dislodged from the roof frame, the amount of load transferred to the trusses decreased.

PAGE 40

40 Figure 3-5 shows a vulnerability curve for the roof-to-wall connections obtained from the original Model. A more reasonable vulnerability curve would exhibit monotonic behavior as the windspeed increased. The solution was therefore to modify the truss failure check process so that results would appear more plausible. The truss vulnerability curve may even be expected to act increase independently of roofcover and sheathing failure because roof-to-wall connection failure can occur before there is any roofcover loss. An overhaul of the original truss failure check routine eliminated the need to check for the uplift pressure on every sheathi ng panel. A truss layout for th e typical residential home was created and drawn in AutoCAD. Trusses were sp aced at 24 inches, meeting the Florida Building Code requirements. The three wind load cases we re drawn up and laid over the new truss layout to see how the truss tributary areas overlapped with the three different pressure zones. The percent area of each truss under a zone was calcu lated using AutoCADs polyline area property, so that a weighted pressure coefficient was obt ained for each truss on the roof. The process of obtaining the weighted pressure coefficients follow ed closely with the pro cess used to create the new sheathing and roofcover pres sure matrices. The subfunction r2w_conn_uplift, whose purpose is to obtain the uplift force in each truss in the form of array, contained a 3-column matrix containing weights by area of the contribution of a pressure zone to a trusss uplift. The 1st column of the array contai ns contributions of the inte rior pressure zone, the 2nd column contains information about the edge pressure zone, and the 3rd column contains information about the corner edge zone. The array is multipli ed with a 3-row column vector containing the random pressure coefficients simulated by MATLAB to represent the pressure coefficients per zone. The matrix product of these two arrays becomes the weighted pressure coefficient for each

PAGE 41

41 truss along a side of the house. The output of this subfunction includes two 2-column arrays containing weighted pressure coe fficients for the trusses along th e front and back of the house, and another for the side trusses, whether gableend or hip trusses. Figure 3-6 shows the typical truss layout for gable and hip roofs. The new method was found to run significantly fa ster, utilizing efficient matrix operations in MATLAB, and eliminated the need to check va lues in the sheathing pressure matrix multiple times. It also corrected the errant trend of th e vulnerability curve at high windspeed, where a higher speed led to a lower number of damaged tr usses. Figure 3-7 presen ts the vulnerability curve obtained from the new algorithm, in comparison to curve from the original model, and the roofcover and sheathing panel loss. Model Calibration and Verification Observed damage data after the 2004 hurricane season is an appropr iate data source to calibrate and validate the FHLM results from the physical damage model. The inspections included houses affected by Hurricanes Charley, Frances, Ivan, and Jeanne. Building components such as roofcover and windows were compared to FHLM results. Homeowners in the vicinity of the hurricane path were stratified into regions based upon maximum windspeed at that residence. The hous es were separated in terms of old and new construction practice, where the older homes were identified as those which were built prior to the 2001 Florida Building Code. For each windspeed region, the shingle loss was classified into six cases of shingle loss, as can be found in Tabl e 3-1. Each case corresponds to percentage loss range. The frequency of each case was obtained, and multiplied by its expected shingle loss percentage, then summed down to obtain the expe cted shingle loss for that windspeed region. The windspeeds were finally divided by the terr ain roughness in the area. The results of these calculations can be seen in Table 3-1.

PAGE 42

42 Three windspeed regions provide d three calibration poi nts that could be plotted with the vulnerability curve. A least-squares method was used to produce a theore tical best-fit curve to the set of three points. The deri vative of the vulnerability curve closely resembles a Gaussian curve, and so the appropriate model curve to go by would be some version of the error function. Thus, the function that was to be modeled takes the form: 1 5 0 ) ( B Ax erf x f, where the error function is defined as: x tdt e x erf022 ) (. The parameters A and B are subject to least squares optimization, to determine the best-fit curve. Once the parameters A and B were obtained for a set of data points for old and new code, the model curve with the corres ponding model parameters were pl otted with the data points and results from the FHLM. The curve obtained from older homes was compared with vulnerability curves for buildings simulated with weak mitigation. Similarly, the model curve for newer homes was compared with buildi ng simulated with strong mitiga tion. Figure 3-8 presents a visual comparison between the data points obtaine d from the damage surveys, the best-fit curve, and the vulnerability curves obtained from simula tion. In Figure 3-9, the reader can see that comparison of the data points for old and new code sample homes, with the vulnerability curves for strong and weak mitigation. Interpretation of Figures: Figures 3-8 and 3-9 demonstrat e the proximity of the results from FHLM simulation of weak and strong mitigati on to the expected loss determined from the damage surveys. The weak model appears more conservative in estimate to the damage survey. This is due to fact that the weak mitigation si mulation represents construction using much older methods, such as toenail connections in the trus ses. The damage survey points representing the old building code are in actuality homes bui lt between the 1994 and 2001 building codes.

PAGE 43

43 Buildings satisfying this criterion can be expect ed to perform significantly better than what the FHLM predicts. Damage survey points obtained for homes built after the implementation of the 2001 Florida Building Code share a stronger resemb lance with strong mitigation results from the Model. The strong mitigation results are based upon construction modeled by current construction practices. The homes with the st rong mitigation package, for example, are constructed with Simpson Strong Ti e roof-to-wall connections. As a result, the total loss for any given windspeed is s ubstantially less. Model Consolidation Originally, the model was created to handle di fferent building characteristics individually. Three regions (south, central, north), two roof t ypes (gable, hip), and tw o construction materials (wood or concrete block walls) tran slated into 12 separate model files that were created, and would need to be run separately with different mitigation parameters. The original Cope Model evolved from a single structural type to many st ructural types with many mitigation scenarios. The most expedient way to expand the original m odel with additional structural types was a cutand-paste procedure, where the original model is save d under a different name, and modifications are made. However, this ultimately produced many models that were difficult to track when using the Model to simulate ma ny possible mitigation op tions. The process of running 12 different files for 12 combinations wi th the same mitigation setting could become tedious and time-consuming, and would requir e supervision throughout simulation time. Much user time was spent organizing and tracking the running of 12 separate models with many combinations of mitigation. This was an impract ical situation with a hi gh degree of likelihood of user error.

PAGE 44

44 Another feature of the new mode l is that is has been consol idated, capable of handling all regions and types, dimensions and mitigation parameters. To do this, the main processes were identified that were common in all 12 damage model files. This included the random generation of the pressure coefficients, the creation of the pressure matrices, initial failure check, internal pressure check, and reiteration unt il no further failure is identified. Some priority variables designate the general direction of the model model location, wall type, and roof type, and mitigation. The mitigation was consolidated into a vector containing scalar values representing different settings for the homes storm preparatio n. Formerly, the mitigation vector was created inside a switch statement. The new FHLM calls the mitigation vector at the functions calling. Some values are read through a text file to allow for sensi tivity analysis. These variables were organized into different categories, and the se ts of values are contained in individual text files to be read by the main dama ge model function. These include the pressure coefficients (i.e., roof pressures, wall pressures), the COV for the pr essure coefficients, internal pressure, and the ASCE K-values for topography, di rectionality, height and importa nce. The variables were set up in such a way that they may be edited without changing the actual damage model files, although can only be changed between simulations. The final step of the consolidation process wa s the separation of diffe rent processes in the code depending on roof type and wall type. A home with a hip roof does not contain any gableend trusses, and likewise the gable roof home does not contain any side trusses. At the appropriate location in the code, a switch statement diverts the flow of code for either a hip or gable roof. A similar situation at a different location occurs when the wall type designates the existence of stud-to-sill c onnections. A wood-frame building requires checks for these

PAGE 45

45 components, but need not be checked for concre te masonry, since they are non-existent in concrete masonry. The consolidation of the different model files into one allows that a function can call these damage models within a loop, and can run a list of simulations without the interaction of the user. Further, the values of the input parameters can be determined in this higher-class function, and be called down to the main function. The larges t benefit of this function is that it removes the need to edit the text inside the code prior to every simulation run. Menu Creation In addition to consolidating the 12 models into a single more flexible model, it became necessary to simplify the means of establishing user input to c ontrol the specifics for a given simulation run (i.e. what kind of model with what mitigations in place). The idea is that a single simple set of commands can be issued to run several models in sequence. These models may have some input parameters in common, and othe r that are unique to th at model. A significant portion of the modification made to the Cope Mode l allow for such sequential runs to be easily declared by the user. The physical damage model, which is capable of being called by the user in a MATLAB environment, is written so that any editing of th e script itself is unnecessary. The list of input variables can be organized into scalars or vector s for easy transfer. In such an environment, it would be very easy to develop another task that c ould load this file multiple times, with different sets of information. A manual menu allows for the user to input the variables sequentially and display it back. A file menu function reads the instructions from a text file, which contains a sequence of key characters and numbers. The objec tive was to develop some routines which can be instructed to call the main damage mode l files, and simulate many runs at once.

PAGE 46

46 Table 3-2 lists the variables and type of all the input variables. Instruct ions may be given in such a way that a variable can be defined once the first time, and be repeated for every run thereafter. Each run is identified by a delimiter. Manual Menu: The manual menu is a method of in struction where th e Model receives input from the keyboard. For example, suppose a us er wants to run two models sequentially. The first is a southern concrete block model that uses hurricane shutters, and the second is a wood frame northern model that uses a different type of window protection. The menu requests simulation details one variable at a time for the fi rst model to be run, unt il all details have been acquired. The menu repeats the details for the late st run back to the user, and then the process can repeat or continue to the simulation step. Th e mitigation vector can be customized, or it can be defined in terms of the standard weak, medi um, or strong mitigation. If a custom mitigation has been defined, then on the following step, the menu will remember the mitigation settings, and will allow as a choice, to repeat the same mitigation vector created. After the list of simulations is created, the list is displayed back to the user for final approval. Upon approval, the simulation run begins. File Menu: To speed automation a file menu was cr eated for a savvy user that wants to avoid pressing all the necessary bu ttons to instruct the simulati on details. The function inputs a file with a sequence of letters a nd numbers that the function is inst ructed to recognize as different desired properties. The user designates the number of simulations on the first line, and subsequent lines would contain in formation pertaining to one simu lation detail. For example, the fourth line represents the roof type. Depending on the number of r uns desired, the information on that line can be set to be g h h h. This tells the program that the user wants the first model to have a gable roof, and wants the second, third, and fourth simulation to have hip roofs. Of

PAGE 47

47 course, it is necessary that the information in th e first line be , representing four simulations. If the roof type line is defined with one letter, g or h, it gives inst ructions that all four simulations are instructed to be with one roof type. These instructions are typical of the region line, wall type line, roof type line, garage line and story line. An example of the input files format can be seen in Figure 3-10. The seventh and subsequent li nes are unique in the manner th e instructions need to be written. The simulation number line must contain one number that will be consistent for all simulations. The windspeed vect or can contain the text default, d, or three numbers representing the lowest windspeed highest windspeed, and windspeed increment to create it. An example is 250 20, which simulates all wind speeds from 50 to 250 mph, at increments of 20 mph. Thus, the vector would ap pear to be 50, 70, 90, and so on until 250 mph. The delimiter line must contain alphanumeric strings, one fo r each simulation desired. The delimiter is an information tag used to identify the MAT-file containing all the information about simulations results. The final line, or lines will contain information about the mitigation. Information for mitigation can be written in one line to be repeat ed, or can be written, simulation at a time, in the following lines. The information read can be w, m, or s, depending on the mitigation package desired. Another option would be to input a delimited string of 11 numbers which designate the set of mitigation one setting at a time. Finally, if all information is inputted correctly into the function, then the simulati on information will be displayed and will ask the user to affirm the instructions. There are numerous benefits to running the simulations using the menu files. It eliminates the need for tedious clerical work, in which the user needs only to press a few buttons, and the rest of the work is done by the menu functions It facilitates information management and

PAGE 48

48 mitigation sensitivity. Because it can be instruct ed to run multiple simulations back to back, it eliminates the supervision previously required on the hour. Thus the modified physical damage component of the FHLM has been transitioned from its original state as a development tool and into a form capable of simulation a multitude of mitigation measures at one instruction. The Model is now more suited for ge neration of a high volume of output. Conclusion The updated and improved physical damage co mponent of the Florida Hurricane Loss Model has been created to facilitate the entire simulation process. The new damage model file is capable of simulating all permutations of the input variables. Higher-class files have been created which allow the user to instruct multiple simula tions at once. This has largely facilitated the management of simulations with different setti ngs, allows the program to run for days on end without running out of instructions. The sensitivity analysis could continue to determine how the model responds to changes in windows and openings strengths to match informa tion obtained from the damage surveys. This aspect of the damage model can be conducted in the same manner as was conducted for the roofcover analysis. The increased breakage of wi ndows will affect the inte rnal pressure of the house. It may be of interested as well to check the history of the internal pressure as damage around the house is recognized. Another direction the model can take is to incorporate irregular shaped homes into the model. The original model was devel oped with rectangular-shaped homes. Further development of the model can lead to improved information about component strengths, particularly from wi ndows, doors and garages. This ma y begin with some destructive testing. Also, analysis of the pressure behavior measured on th e instrumented roofs from the

PAGE 49

49 FCMP program can be used to assess the precision of pressure coefficient values adapted from ASCE 7 for use in this Model. To improve the functionality of the Hurrican e Loss Model, it may be advantageous to create a graphical user interface in MATLAB to manage the simulations, replacing the menu functions created. A GUI can assist the user in seeing all the simulation details simultaneously. The interface can be a system of click-boxes and radio buttons, representing each simulation detail, such a roof type. Much of the code fo r this GUI can be acquired from the original menu files. Finally, a more significant overhaul of the FHLM could be undertaken to allow the inclusion of wind speed duration and the accumu lation of damage to the same model from multiple wind speeds and directions. The current approach simply applies a single speed and direction to a given model to tabulate total da mage to that sample home. A more realistic scenario would include damage as it accumulates from low winds speeds through the peak winds from a given hurricane, including the directiona l changes. This will require the wind field modeling team to work in concert with the phys ical damage modeling te am. Currently these two model components (wind and damage ) are being developed separately This was important to the overall model development process to avoid th e assumptions and shortcomings of one model component to affect the development of the others. However, each component has now been sufficiently developed that such interact ions between model components can now be investigated.

PAGE 50

50 Table 3-1. Model Calibration Points Old Code New Code Case (mph) 110-120 130-140 140-150 110-120 1 30-140 1 40-150 0% 9 8 2 8 6 9 0-2% 3 9 4 4 4 2 3-5% 0 5 3 0 0 8 6-10% 0 5 6 0 2 1 11-25% 0 7 4 0 0 1 26-50% 0 7 4 0 0 1 12 41 23 12 12 22 Total 76 46 Expected Loss (%) 0.50 15.07 16.65 0.67 2.33 5.86 Table 3-2. Input Variables to Consolidated Damage Model # Variable Name Data Type Example Values 1 Number of simulation runs Integer 10 2 Region type Character n, c, s 3 Wall type Character c, w 4 Roof type Character g, h 5 Garage Character y, n 6 Number of stories Integer 1, 2 7 Number of simulations per model Integer 1000 8 Wind speed vector 3x1 Integer, String 50 250 10, default 9 Delimiters for simulations Nx1 String delim1 delim2 delim3 10 Mitigation vector 11x1 Integer, Character s, m, w

PAGE 51

51 Figure 3-1. Flow Chart of Fl orida Hurricane Loss Model. Figure 3-2. Diagram of Typical Residential Home & Components (Cope, 2004) Openings Roof Sheathing Roof Cover Roof to Wall Connections Walls Openings Roof Sheathing Roof Cover Roof to Wall Connections Walls

PAGE 52

52 Figure 3-3. Typical Sheathing Panel Pattern. A) Gable Roof. B) Hip Roof. Figure 3-4. Wind Load Cases. A) Gable Roof B) Hip Roof.

PAGE 53

53 Figure 3-5. Original Truss Vulnerability Cu rve. A) The Max and Min lines represent the maximum and minimum truss failure simula ted for a given windspeed. B) The Roof Cover and Sheathing Panel is presented in comparison with R oof-to-Wall Connection Failure.

PAGE 54

54 Figure 3-6. Typical Truss Layouts. A) Gable Roof. B) Hip Roof. Figure 3-7. Comparison of Original and New Truss Vulnerability Curves.

PAGE 55

55 Figure 3-8. Comparison of Vulnerability Curves to Damage Survey Points and Best-Fit Curve. A) Weak Model to Old Building Code. B) Strong Model to New Building Code.

PAGE 56

56 Figure 3-9. Comparison of Weak an d Strong Models, Old and New Building Code Damage Survey Data Points. Figure 3-10. Example Input File for File Menu.

PAGE 57

57 CHAPTER 4 DEVELOPMENT OF COMMERCIAL HURRICANE LOSS MODEL Introduction The State of Florida has contracted the cons ortium that developed the Florida Hurricane Loss Model (FHLM) to extend the model from residential to commercial structures. The construction methodology for reside ntial housing differs greatly from that used for commercial structures, and thus this expa nsion of the physical damage component of the FHLM is a significant undertaking. This chap ter addresses the beginnings of th e process needed to assemble the probabilistic physical damage model for commer cial structures, and will serve as a roadmap for the next student. Other than residential buildings what other types of buildings claim significant losses from tropical storm damage? Examples of structures not included in the scope of the residential model are condominiums, office buildings, warehouses, hos pitals, schools, and many others. Most of these buildings are multi-story, and can be located in a variety of different terrains. They can be located near other multi-story buildings, or in open land where the nearest building is far away. The majority of exposures are classified somewh ere between these two ex tremes. In the case of residential housing, it is a reasonable assumpti on that the vast majority of homes are located within a suburban setting with similar structures surrounding it. Commercial structures can be much more variable in their su rroundings, from being the highest building for miles (e.g. threestory condos in a mostly single family home s uburban setting), to being a relatively small building in the immediate vicinity (e.g. three-story condo near talle r office buildings near a city). Commercial structures also offer a greater variety of bu ilding styles and construction materials relative to residential. For example, cu rtain walls may be glass, brick, or many other options, each with a different set of vulnera bilities to be considered in high winds.

PAGE 58

58 The effects of wind on commercial structures are quite different from one-story residential buildings. Because they are much taller, the varia tion of wind in the vertical direction is much larger. The wind flow around the building has hi gh amounts of turbulence due to the larger obstruction of the commercial building. Turbulen ce has the capability of lifting objects off the ground. Objects which have become air-borne beco me projectiles and can potentially impact the curtain wall. In the case where the curtain wall is made of glass, the building envelope can be penetrated, and would invite wate r intrusion. Moreover, equipmen t on the roof is vulnerable to impact breakage because of high wind flow and pressure. Repairs associated with this amount of da mage can be very significant. Any windows impacted and breached will need to be replaced. Interior renovati on is possible because of water penetration. Office equipment, including comput er hardware and furniture, may need to be replaced. Also, if the structure is adorned with exterior insulation finish systems (EIFS), the faade will need replacement. The mechanical equipment will also need to be inspected for damage. Damage will necessitate repair or replacement. Aside from component damage, interior or ex terior, a damaged building is outside of its functionality. Inhabiting reside nts are displaced from their dw ellings. Potential patrons are deterred from appealing tourist spots. An offi ce building out of commissi on may be unfit to serve as a place of work until repaired. This can re sult in a business being unable to perform normal day-to-day operations, and lose potential business. All of these considerat ions must be accounted for when projecting insured losses due to hurricane winds on commercial structures. The UF team contributing to this multi-university effort is again focusing on the modeling of the phys ical damage to the exterior of the building. This chapter will address the work that has begun along those lines.

PAGE 59

59 Effects of Wind on Multi-Story Buildings Damage measured on a multi-story building is th e combination different failure types. The structural frame of the building is not likely to collapse from even very severe wind. However, there are many components on the exterior of th e building that can fail at modest wind speeds and produce insurable losses. The building envelope designed with more aes thetical priority, is modularized. The loss of a unit gl ass wall cover should not contribu te to the collapse of the structure, but will permit water penetration, content loss, and loss of functionality. Sources of damage were categorized to commence the development of a multi-rise building model. They may be organized into three cont ributing sources: Debris impact; Water intrusion; Faade damage. Debris Impact The flow of wind provides an energy source th at is dissipated into various mechanical processes. It holds the capacity to transport objects of significa nt mass. For example, water may be regarded as a particle. Wind certainly has the ability to driv e the particle through the air. Eventually, the water may collide against some surface, and will transfer energy-momentum to that surface in the form of some concentrated pressure. Cladding materials such as glass and EIFS will be subjected to that concentrated pr essure. The goal will be to analyze the energymomentum that an air-borne particle can transm it, and how much a cladding material can resist. The concept is expandable to other objects su ch as cladding materials from nearby damaged structures, gravel ballast on n earby roofs, vegetation, etc. An object becomes air-borne from the wind fl ow interacting around it as well as with the surface supporting the object. The wind energy around the object is enough to overcome its inertia. The transfer may be expressed in term s of its energy or momentum. For example, the

PAGE 60

60 wind energy may expressed as: V v 22 1, in terms of the density of air, velocity, and the volume of air. It is also possi ble to calculate the inertia of an object. The wind energy and the object inertia in the volume displaced can be compared to identify if objects are capable of becoming air-borne. Realistic components of debris can be identifi ed and analyzed to de termine its inertia. The common things that compose debris in general co nsist of roofing material (gravel, shingles), temporary construction material, and cl adding materials (e.g. broken glass). An object that is traveling through the air is av ailable to strike against the surface of some building cladding material. Window glass, brittle in behavior, can shatter upon impact. EIFS, or synthetic stucco, can be impacted and expose the foam material underneath the base coat, making it vulnerable to water, and long-term dete rioration. Window strengt h must be considered from a statistical point of view, and phenome non of failure will be a consequence of its comparison with debris impact statistics. The terrain surrounding the st ructure being modeled is a critical component for determination of vulnerability to windborne debris. A 10 story condo surrounded by 5-story buildings with gravel ballast roofs will be subjected to a heavy concentration of debris. Water Intrusion Water intrusion is a consequence of debris impact, performance of exterior windows and doors, and the performance of th e roof membrane. Debris impact can produce breaches in the building envelope that permit wind driven rain to enter. The water membrane on the roof may be torn from loading or debris and permit water to enter from the top down. Windows and sliding glass doors that fail under cyclical wind pressu re loading can also produce significant water penetration. However, physical failure of componen ts is not the only cause of water penetration.

PAGE 61

61 Larger surface area windows and double sliding glass doors on condo balconies can flex under high winds. This flexure may not cause the failure of the door or window, but the deformation may provide a path for water penetration through the separation between frame and wall. This has been observed in many hurricanes. Water penetration can cause interi or contents of the building to be damaged to the point of repair or replacement, and lead to premature de terioration of metal fasteners in the building framing and curtain wall systems. The UF efforts on the commercial modeling addition to the FHLM will focus on the physical damage to the exterior of the buildi ng and the failure of components. Other model development teams will specifically the address th e water penetration issue on interior losses. Faade Damage The building envelope provides aesthetic appeal and protects the interior from damage. It may also provide assistance to the structural frame in resistance shear and moment. Typical faade materials of multi-story buildings in Florid a are stucco, glass, brick veneer, and exterior insulation finish system (EIFS). S ynthetic stucco is a material that is applied to concrete masonry to provide additional thermal insulation to the building. Glass allows transmittance of light and other aesthetic appeal. Brick veneer also pr ovides aesthetic appeal and a second layer of structural protection over the concrete masonry. EIFS provides thermal insulation, more so than stucco, but is vulnerable to impact from debris or even vandalism. Damage to a building facade can be caused fr om a variety of things. Wind suction on the leeward side of a building can undo adhesives or mechanical fasteners binding the exterior wall to aesthetic cladding, such as EIFS. This o ccurrence is accompanied with water penetration which can compromise the performance of EIFS and brick veneer, if constructed with poor

PAGE 62

62 craftsmanship. Debris impact, already discussed, can penetrate the faade to expose the interior, if the striking object tran sfers enough energy-momentum. Fundamentals of Developing the Hurricane Loss Model The commercial FHLM will be developed in si milar manner as the residential Model was constructed. The model program is a Monte Ca rlo simulation, randomly generating wind loads and wind-borne projectiles, and randomly assigning component strengths. A check will identify if a component has failed under the wind forces. Th e load side of the equation will be developed from ASCE 7 for acquiring wind pressure, along with a suitable debris impact model, encompassing many types of objects relevant to mu lti-story buildings. The resistance side of the equation will be developed based upon statistica l strengths of glass and EIFS. In a departure from the modeling assumptions used for the resi dential model, the failure of doors and windows will be expanded to include not only physical brea kage, but also sufficient deformation to permit water penetration. Modeling Debris Impact Much like the residential Hurricane Loss Model, impact damage is positively correlated with windspeed. A higher windspeed will induce mo re movement of objects which potentially can become missiles. As the objects increase in velocity, they gain more kinetic energy. The probability of the missile impacting something vul nerable may be considered proportional to the vulnerable area as a fraction of the entire envelope. To develop a debris impact mode l, it would be necessary to consider the list of objects which compose debris observed in the afterm ath inspections of multi-story buildings. To properly simulate debris affecting these structures, it would be prope r to stratify different classes of these objects, based upon distributions of cer tain properties. These properties ought to be identified in terms of density and object dimensions.

PAGE 63

63 It would be necessary to identify the source of each class of ob jects. For example, gravel is found on the roof top, but may also originate fr om the building landscaping scheme at the ground floor. Garbage and temporary construction materi al may usually be found near the ground floor. After the wind picks up the object, it has the capa bility of traveling up or down, depending on the objects initial position. When air-borne, the object inertial energy can be determined. Variables such as the object density, dimension, and relative speed affect its energy. The probability of breaching a window or penetrating a buildings vulnerable faade w ill depend on the possible breaching area, and the strength of the vulnerable faade. The different classes of objects which will be considered by the model to have the possibility of becoming air-borne and impacting can be broken down into four distinct groups. Gravel from the roof of a building and adj acent buildings can compro mise the life of its cladding. Timber material is also capable of penetrating windows. Plyw ood material is a flat object which has an ease of creating lift when wi nd is passed underneath it. Shingles made of ceramic or asphalt composes the fourth category of debris that can collect in the air and wreak havoc on multi-story buildings. Gravel Ballast: Gravel is the only category of these four that is considered round. These small rocks composed mainly of limestone have b een modeled in the past with a mean diameter of 12 mm (HAZUS, 2000). This was measured in inspection of the Marriot-Datran Complex in Miami, Florida following Hurricane Andrew. The un it weight of this limestone gravel can be assumed to be 122 pcf (19.2 kN/m3) (Suiker et. al, 2005). The gravel ballast is also assumed to be uniformly graded, which implies the COV for gravel density is fairly low. Because of

PAGE 64

64 uniformity, the distribution of gr avel diameters would be appropr iately modeled as a uniform distribution. Timber Members: The second category of debris to be modeled is timber material composed from temporary construction material. In the state of Florida, the most common wood used is Southern Pine, which has a dry specific weight of 0.55 equivalent to 34.32 pcf. The variation in weight of timber can be assumed to be between 0 and 20% moisture content, and this is plausible due to rain and increased humidity during a storm. At the hi ghest water content, the unit weight increases to 41.18 pcf. If the probabil ity of a random timber object having density between 34.32 pcf (dry weight) and 41.18 pcf (20% moisture) is assumed to include 95% of all possibilities (4 standard deviat ions, assuming a Gaussian distri bution), the mean unit weight could be assumed to be 37.55 pcf, with a COV of about 5% ( = 1.715/37.55) (NDS, 2005). Dimensions for a timber member consist of one long dimension, and two relatively short dimensions. The two shorter determine the size of the timber. For example, a 2x4 member typically has actual dimensions of 1 inches by 3 inches (NDS, 2005). As the member flows in the wind, the direction of flow will probably be parallel to its longitudinal axis. The smaller dimensions will be in the plane normal to the ve locity, and because of it s geometry will catalyze air viscosity. The characteristic length of a ll timber members can be modeled as a normal distribution, taking the average of the shorter lengths. The COV of this length should be fairly large to consider a variety of cu t sizes. This would provide a r ealistic distribution of all timber members in its possibility of comprising the de bris cloud, because the characteristic length is related to the radius of impact to be considered later on. Plywood Members: A third category of potential miss iles are sheets of plywood, large and small, that become air-borne from the eff ects of hurricane winds giving it lift off the ground.

PAGE 65

65 The material density can be modeled to the same distribution for timber i.e., mean unit weight of 37.55 pcf 5%. Typical dimensions can be anyw here from 4 feet by 8 feet for one complete sheathing panel, down to a piece small enough to cr eate uplift at 50 mph. Juxtaposing the timber material, plywood will have two long dimensions and one short one. The characteristic length, related to the iner tial energy of the object, c ould be modeled to take the average of the longer dimensions. Roof Cover: The fourth category comprising the cl asses of debris is shingles. This category may be opened up to two types of shi ngles, asphalt and clay. They are made up of different materials, and also have distinct geometries. Asphalt shi ngles have been modeled in the current FHLM (Cope, 2004), but may require some modification. Now with a survey of different objects that can be flying through the air, capable of creating damage on the modeled stru cture, it is possible to establis h some criteria to determine flight. This flight occurs when the velocity energy surrounding the object is able to counteract its inertia. The criterion is dependant on the mode led wind speed, air density, object density and characteristic length. Determining Uplift: The density of air varies with rela tive humidity, but the dry weight of air at standard temperate will be approximately 11.7 kN/m3. This quantity may want to be modeled as a normal distribution. An increase in relative humidity will increase the air density, which would improve the object buoyancy. This could improve the chances of liftoff. The criterion in equation form can be expressed as: g C I UF a m 22 (Lee & Willis, 2002). The object density and air density, m and a, respectively, are compared in ratio. The constants I and CF are related to the objects abil ity to resist the flow of air. I is considered the ratio of force required to overcome the object wei ght. This variable takes the value greater than

PAGE 66

66 or equal to unity. It could be modeled as some lognormal distribution with unity as some value less than the mean. The aerodynamic force coefficient, CF, is related to the curvature of the face of the object in the direction of flow. Determining Damage Energy: If an object satisfies the above condition, then the probability of the object striking the model buildings cladding would be non-zero. The damage equation would depend on the object and air density weight ratio and aerodynamic coefficient as before, and introduce a ratio of the object to wind speed J. The damage energy of an object can be designated as: 8 2 316 1 U J Ig C Dm a F m (Lee & Willis, 2002). This quantity will be expressed in units of energy. This way, it can be compared to impact energy of cladding material. An alternative approach to estimating damage from air-borne objects was also provided by Lee and Willis (2002). A linear relationship is obtained in terms of the windspeed and the characteristic length and ratio of object density to air density. This relation applies well to sheets and cubes: a mg U 2. A reference point can be used to establish the proportionality constant. Knowing an objects le ngth and characteristic length, the necessary windspeed for liftoff can be calculated as a check. Modeling Vulnerable Cladding The impact resistance of cladding materials must be considered to successfully model damage from debris impact. It has been discussed that the main types of cladding that will be modeled will be EIFS and glass. Synthetic stucco is a composite material of organic plastics and cement. Together, they provide thermal insulation wh en applied to the exterior of a building, as

PAGE 67

67 well as aesthetic appeal. Glass is a brittle materi al allowing transmittance of light, and is perhaps the most common noticed component of any multi-story building. Exterior Insulation Finish Systems. Synthetic stucco is known to have frequent failure in every day function (Lampo & Trovill ion, 1996), and is amplified w ith the event of a hurricane. Main causes of failure include poor workmanship, thin base coat application, low resistance to suction pressure, and water intrusion. Impact dama ge increases synthetic stuccos probability of failure. Cracks peel off from the puncture hole created by impact. Water may enter through the opening, and will be absorbed by the foam material beneath. Eventually, the humidity inside the foam will affect the adhesive material bonding the substrate wall to the synthetic stucco finish, and will cause delamination. This will necessitate replacement of the exterior finishing material. Figure 4-1 below shows a damaged EIFS system on a hotel after the 2004 hurricanes in Florida. Significant damage from water penetration occurre d to the building after the EIFS system failure. Investigation of synthetic st uccos strength from impact was thoroughly conducted. Two engineers wrote three papers regarding EIFS properties and st rength (Lampo & Trovillion, 1996). One surveying its impact resistance included three tests: the Fallin g Weight, Falling Ball, and the Perfotest. The Falling Weight test involved a ball tied to a string to be dropped onto a sheet of EIFS. The Falling Ball test dropped a ball vertically over a sheet of EIFS. The Perfotest involved a rod projectile connect ed to a machine from a certain height above the stucco. Of the procedures investigated one is of most interest the Falling Ball Test. Two modes of the test used two balls, one heavier than the other, to punc h through the EIFS. The lighter ball of 2 pounds and 2-3/8 inches in di ameter was dropped from a hei ght of 30 feet. A second ball of 4 pounds and 3 inches was dropped from 15 feet. Th e balls energy-momentum was calculated.

PAGE 68

68 The investigations tested two standard types of synthetic st ucco, namely type PB and PM (defined below). EIFS is constructed with a plas tic in foam form covering the substrate wall, providing excellent thermal insulati on. Within the foam is a reinforcement mesh of one or two layers, to absorb shock from impact. There are predominant types of reinforcement standard mesh and impact-resistant mesh. The side of the foam touching the wall is covered with an adhesive for application. The foam assembly is covered with a cementitious base coat, with hints of polymer as well. The base coat protects th e vulnerable foam underneath. PB, standing for polymer-based, is usually constructed with the inside foam made of molded expanded polysterene (MEPS). PM, sta nding for polymer-modified, contains extruded expanded polysterene (XEPS), or pol yisocyanurate (PIR). One property that has best correl ation with impact resistance is the base coat thickness. A thicker base coat increases the impact resistance of EIFS. PM is much stronger than PB, but because of economy, PB is much more common in the market. In general, increasing the number of layers and improving their quality increases the strength of the finish system. However, results of the exam indicate that the type and amount of reinforcement in the synthetic stucco finish does not necessarily improve the materials imp act resistance (Lampo & Trovillion, 1995). A few instances occurred where finishes with less reinforcement performed better than samples with more reinforcement. Presentation of the results in the report by La mpo and Trovillion give excellent leads into modeling EIFS. Trends of mean failure energy (M FE) versus base coat thickness were plotted. There exists a significant positive correlation, and the failure of the synthetic stucco is measured in units of energy. The linear trend was combin ed for PB and PM systems. The relation between MFE (in Joules) and thickness t (in millimeters) is: t MFE 847 1 642 0 The correlation

PAGE 69

69 coefficient for this relation is R2 = 0.770, which is moderately high. The correlation justifies using a high COV in relating strength to thickness of EIFS. Glass. Glass is perhaps the most noticed cladding material of most structures. It provides an aesthetically pleasing decoration to the exterior to the building, and essential for satisfactory light transmittance and energy savings. It is a crucial component of an architects design. Engineers must design glass cladding to transfer stresses to the frame. Because glass is a brittle material and can shatter upon impact, the Florida Building Code sets requirements for impact-resistance windows. Particularly, the South Florida Building Code obligates windows in the lower 60 feet of a building to be designed for impact resistance. This is due to the higher expected 50-year windspeed in the region (ASCE, 2002). Recent observed failures of glass cladding from impact higher th an 60 feet after hurricane Wilma in 2005 is now driving the Florida Building Co mmission to reconsider the 60 feet height limit on impact protective glass systems. Glass used as cladding on multi-rise struct ures can be constructed in several ways. Monolithic glass can be attached to multiple stories. Glass can be attached to one story at a time. Engineers must design for appropriately-sized expansion joints, more crucial for monolithic glass. Treatment of glass for increased resistan ce includes annealed, heat-strengthened, and tempered glass. Impact resistant glass, also referr ed to as sacrificial ply, contains two layers of soda-lime glass plies, and one layer of polyvinyl butyral (P VB) (Saxe et. al, 2002). The PVB layer acts as resistance to the br each of the window, in that it holds the two plies together in the event of impact. Normally, an impacted window w ill shatter, but with the help of the PVB there is decreased likelihood of this happening. This can prevent breach and water intrusion to the

PAGE 70

70 buildings interior. Despite savings of interior furniture and equipment, the window would need to be replaced after the storm. Failure of glass in the event of a hurricane coul d be attributed to the combination of out-ofplane forces, such as pushing or pulling pressu re, and impact breakage from debris. Loaddeflection relationships are av ailable for windows (Minor & No rville, 2006). These may be superposed with a concentrated pressure from impact to obtain the deflection of a window. The HAZUS Manual (2000) presented some ranges of momentum breakage of windows used in their modeling of some case studies. Mo mentum breakage values of a variety of window types can be anywhere between 0.01 to 0.08 kgm/s, units of momentum. The energy breakage derived can be compared to the damage func tion for debris objects (Lee & Willis, 2002). The impact resistance of sacr ificial ply windows was invest igated by Saxe and others (2002). The test involved impacting the surface of th e glass with steel balls of various sizes and weights. The balls were impacted at various velocities, until a mean minimum breakage velocity (MMBV) was obtained. Knowing the objects mass and velocity allows for both an energy and momentum approach to window breakage. The pa per also provided vulnerability curves for probability of failure versus MMBV. It was concl uded that increasing the steel ball size brings down the MMBV. Attempts to fit the MMBV to pr obability distributions were unsuccessful. The paper stated that the Weibu ll distribution was conservative compared to the normal and lognormal distributions. Modeling Methodology The information described above was noted because of its potential to help create a Monte Carlo simulation that could estimate damage on mu lti-story buildings. The process, similar to the residential model, will involve random simula tion of the load, and random simulation of the resistance, where the randomness is described by an appropriate statistical model. The

PAGE 71

71 identification of damage or failure involves comp arison of the load and resistance. If the load exceeds the resistance, then that co nstitutes failure of the component. A flow chart of the debris impact model for the commercial FHLM can be encountered in Figure 4-2. The debris model should somewhat re semble the residential model. It would be necessary to establish the number of objects, which initially stat ionary, can potentially become air-borne and compose the debris cloud. An en ergy approach to flight and failure will be composed. This would also requir e the strength of the cladding mate rials to be associated with maximum absorbed impact energy. The damage energy will be compared to the resistance energy and damage if any will be identified. Th e damage of windows may be expressed in terms of breach of windows. If one window is impact ed twice, only one wi ndow will need to be replaced. The summation of damaged EIFS may be calculated in percent of envelope area. The program must assume a certain amount of e ach type of debris av ailable for impact. For example, if the class of debris considered is gravel, then an appropria te amount would depend on the roofs square footage covered with gravel ball ast, and how deep the layer of ballast is on the roof. The amount of timber material will depend on the presence of some formwork, tents, or garbage somewhere in the vicinity. Timber materi al will usually be enco untered at ground floor. Once this number is determined for the class of debris, then a density a nd characteristic length vector should be created, representing one row fo r every object that will be considered in the debris impact model. For each object to be considered, for every cla ss of debris, the process would continue with the random simulation of characteristic lengt hs and object densities. The aerodynamic force coefficient may be determined once for each class of object. This will vary from class to class, but probably not from obj ect to object in the same class. For example, the gravel ballast can be

PAGE 72

72 modeled as spherical particles, and so the aer odynamic coefficient will be unique compared to timber members and plywood. These two classes ha ve predominantly flat faces, normal to the wind in flight, and so will assume a different aerodynamic coefficient CF. The ratio of force required for lift to inertial energy is a value that must be greater than unity, and can be assumed to be less than some upper limit, say 1.4. Thes e values may serve as the 2 standard deviations below and above the mean value (95%), and be ca lculated back to obtain the mean and COV for this variable. The variables considered so far are the object s density and characteri stic length, the force ratio, and aerodynamic coefficient. Of these, the first three should be randomly simulated vectors, one for each object to be considered fo r lift. The fourth should be determined as a constant depending on the class of debris being c onsidered. To check for lift, the relation by Lee and Willis should be considered (2002). The final ingredients to i nput into the relation are th e windspeed and air density. Windspeed can be modeled in similar fashion as in the residential v ector. A specific 3-second gust wind speed value at 10 meter elevation is assi gned, and the resultant load over the surface of the structure determined using ASCE 7 pressure coefficients with some randomization added. The increase of wind speed with he ight will also be accounted for. With all of the ingredients generated, the equation above can be implemented into the model. A factor equal to the right-hand side of the relation can be dete rmined for every object considered, and be compared to the square of th e velocity on the left-hand side. The identifier for lift can be obtained in this manner, and objects not containing lift will be disregarded for the remainder of the model.

PAGE 73

73 Next, the probability that an air-borne objec t will impact the building envelop must be considered. The definition of this number calls fo r further development and search for statistics. This value can trim down the list of objects th at are flying through the air down to objects that will be assumed to strike building exterior. The damage energy of each object assumed to strike the building will be calculated. It has been mentioned that the largest factor related to impact resistance of EIFS systems is the base coat thickness. Relations between base coat thickness and mean failure energy have been discussed for exterior insulation finish sy stems (EIFS). However, a suitable distribution for EIFS base coat thickness needs to be created. Typically, polymer-modified stucco is stronger than the polymer-based version, although PB is found to be much more common in practice. The threshold of thickness for synthetic stuccos coat thickness between PB and PM systems is about , which is equivalent to 6.35 mm Base coat thickness of PB stucco is below this threshold. It might be logical to implement two mean values fo r the base coat thickness of EIFS, one for PB and another for PM. The COV can be the same for both, but it may be recommended to see a high value to incorporate the in consistencies in workmanship. The mean failure energy of the finish can be derived from the thickness. Finall y, when there is impact, it can be assumed that there will be an area of impact centered at the contact between de bris and finish. A radius of impact could provide a way to calculated the dama ged area, and express it as a percentage of the total EIFS area that will need to be replaced. Another avenue of EIFS damage that could be considered is from suction pull-off. The delamination of stucco from the substrate wall is so mething that is not so easy to identify as is debris impact, but is consequential of wate r intrusion into the MEPS foam beneath the cementitious base coat (Cheple & Huelman, 2000). There are numerous modeling challenges in

PAGE 74

74 identifying and quantifying delamination. The phenomenon of delamination is cause by water penetration beneath the base coat, and is a gradual process that eventually undoes the effectiveness of the adhesive binding the finish to the substrate wall, typically concrete masonry for our studies. The amount of water penetration necessary to cause delamination will need to be investigated, as well as the typical area of dela mination as a function of water penetration will need to determined. The effects of negative wi nd pressure on a vulnerable delaminated wall portion will also need to be determined. In order to model glass, an energy approach to the impact breakage must be devised. Currently, sources have been found which expre ss the strength in terms of momentum. One paper provides results universal to the ener gy or momentum approach (Saxe et. al, 2002). However, more investigation is necessary for ot her types of glass found in multi-story buildings. It is possible to model two types of glass, imp act-resistant or sacrificial ply, and non-impact resistant glass, such as annealed, te mpered, or heat-strengthened glass. Conclusion This chapter presents a starting point for deve lopment of a probabilistic physical damage model of commercial structures. The major co mponents under consideration will be debris impact resistance, cladding system failure m odes, water penetration through failed roof membrane or failed or deformed windows and doors, and damage to the faade itself. A proposed debris impact model has been pres ented. The impact resistance of exterior insulating finish systems and glass has been in vestigated. Other aspects of the model which require further investigation incl ude building geometry statistics, distribution of occupancy types from city to city, information about building materi al statistics, statistics on building heights and stories, and an investigation of surface roughness and the variation of them throughout an urban area and boundaries. Once the building and neig hborhood layout has been simulated randomly, it

PAGE 75

75 would be possible to determine the amount of availa ble debris as well as the likelihood of debris impact on the model building. Similar to the study conducted for the resident ial model, a study of the land area and its constituents is necessary to compose a succe ssful model of estimating damage on multi-story buildings. This time, a study will need to be done for urban areas, where midand high-rise buildings are common and in highest concentrat ion. A study to identify properties of these buildings will reveal statistical parameters that can be used for a Monte Carlo simulation. For example, the relative use of EIFS, glass, and brick cladding systems on condominiums. Variables that could be modeled statistically, given there is sufficient information available, are building heights and stories, building areas, and terrain. There many cities in the Southeast United States that have numerous high-rise structures in a condensed urban area, and may also have some development authority involving th e construction and maintenance of these structures: Miami, Ft. Lauderdale, Palm Beach, Atlanta, Charlott e, Houston, New Orleans, Mobile are some examples. Information can be derived city by city, for a co uple cities, and then s pot-check the rest to see if there is a startling discrepancy in statis tics. Information that could be useful for the commercial FHLM in an urban study can start wi th obtaining information about the distribution of different building occupancy types, i.e., bus iness, institutional, and residential. The International Building Code (IBC) defines building in terms of their function to the public. Most relevant to a study of high-rise buildings incl ude office buildings, hospitals, condominiums, and hotels. The IBC (and FBC) also provides limits to building heights a nd building area per floor depending on the fire resistance of particular structural elemen ts. Thus, reviewing information

PAGE 76

76 available about the fire safety of a building or buildings in a locality can provide a detour to obtaining building area and height statistics. A second motivation for a building study in ur ban areas is to obtain some information about the material used for cu rtain wall, history of EIFS inst allation or maintenance, etc. Materials of a buildings curtain wall construction can be glass, c oncrete masonry, brick veneer, stucco, EIFS, or even timber frame. Characterist ics of glass, impact-resi stant or not, throughout the building, what size of glass sheets were inst alled is also of interest. Locations of EIFS and stucco, relative to floor and wall, are also of interest. Another aspect of building cons truction that can be included is building fl oor layout and cross-section shape. The simplest cases are round and rectangular, but architects strive for more abstract shapes and layouts every day, to accommodate for the publics increasing demand for aesthetics. The dimensions of these layouts can be obtained from average area per floor. Once this information is obtained, a building can be created from an entourage of randomly simulated variables, which can be stratified in the methods describe d. Properties of the building, such as height in stories, area per floor, and sh ape (circular or rectangular) can be determined by random simulation. The terrain r oughness in the area can be simu lated to reduce the simulated windspeed. The building can be created in the mi ddle of 8 adjacent buildings, also of variable height, area, and shape. The simulation of these buildings may assist in determining the amount of debris present. For example, adjacent buildings gravel ballast at the roof level will make the model buildings curtai n wall vulnerable. Once the model building and adjacent high-rises have been simulated, the amount of debris can be modeled as a function of the buildings si mulated. Case studies have shown that window breakage from gravel ballast occurred near the initial position of the debris (i.e., from building

PAGE 77

77 roof) (HAZUS, 2000). Other debris starting at the ground floor can be modele d to possibly affect a certain number of stories above ground. The window configuration on buildings can ta ke two forms monolithic construction or single-story assembly. In these di ffering types of construction, the windows can be installed as to span one story at a time, or multiple stories. Th e impact of the different methods involves the window area subject to breakage. If a multi-story spanning window is broken, that is more damage as a percentage than if a single-story window is broken. There is also a possibility that a window can be impacted more than once. It would be necessary to identify a particle of debris that has impacted to a window th at is subject to being impact ed. Multiple impacts must be considered, especially if one succeeds in breaking the window and another doesnt. The amount of windows is a function of the buildings stories and area. Once a suitable number for windows is determined, their strengths and damage indi cators can be vectorized. Some building codes require that impact-resistant windows be inst alled from the ground floor up to a minimum distance. They may or may not be a desire to identify the floor and wall where the window is located. Further investigation needs to produce a sta tistical model for the impact resistance of windows. It would be ideal to ob tain some relation about the stre ngth of glass from impact. It would be advantageous to create this model from an energy po int of view, consistent with information about the strength of EIFS and impact from missiles. Another area that was addre ssed earlier but not discussed is the amount of mechanical equipment damage that may or may not be included in the model. Questions to answer are what are typical configurations or mechanical equipmen t, what are identifiable limit states of the equipment, and can the mechanical equipment itse lf become debris and impact nearby windows.

PAGE 78

78 The last aspect of the commercial that needs further development is the estimation of wind on the building. ASCE 7 contains design recomme ndations for a building of all heights. The wind pressure increases with height, and the code provides factors to multiple the pressure at gradient height with depending on the height considered. These factors are believed to obey some power or logarithmic rule (Simiu, 1996). It may be advantageous to implement these rules, because the pressure coefficients will get very conservative after 200 feet in height. At this point, the coefficients are increased in 50-ft incr ements. A good approach to modeling wind in the vertical direction would be to simulate constant lateral pre ssures per floor.

PAGE 79

79 Figure 4-1. EIFS-clad Building Damaged by Fr ances and Jeanne, Satellite Beach, Florida.

PAGE 80

80 Figure 4-3. Flow Chart for Commercial Hurricane Loss Model Debris Impact Model.

PAGE 81

81 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION Hurricane Damage Mitigation This thesis presents contributions to se veral ongoing efforts to mitigate hurricane wind damage to the man-made infrastructure. Chase software The collection of in-field extreme wind data will be enhanced through the development of an interactive tool (Chase) that provides a m eans to visualize alternat ive equipment deployment scenarios. The program was designed so that ne arly anyone can produce a KML file interpretable by Google Earth (GE) software. This will aid sign ificantly in the decision making process in a high-stress environment with a s hort window of opportunity. The t ool allows the user to adapt and develop new strategies based on the most re cent information on storm path, intensity and size. Improvements can be made to the original program to further facilitate the work of the Florida Coastal Monitoring Program. Determining an estimated time of landfall would give the tower deployment team a timetable for deploying all towers before the hurricanes precession reaches land. Information about timestamp of coordinates and translation velocity would facilitate this. Chase should also be able to customize the order of the towers in deployment as seen in Google Earth, as well as provide hyperl ink information in the ob jects tag box (in GE) leading to the 15-minute summary files posted online. A land use land cover database that contains ground roughness data in GIS format shoul d be interfaced with Chase to allow users to fine-tune tower placement based on surrounding terrai n. In this manner a deployment team could conceivably have precise GPS c oordinates for instrument deployment location before even getting to the area.

PAGE 82

82 Computational Model of Structural Vulnerability to Hurricane Winds The residential physical damage prediction co mponent to the Florid a Public Hurricane Loss Projection Model was overhauled to create a product that could be used by research assistants in other schools to estimate damages to residential homes. The simulation engine was based on the Monte Carlo methodology, which si mulates a residence with random wind loads and component resistances, identifies and record s failure from roof to foundation, and compiles the information for statistical analysis. A correction to the routine calculating roof -to-wall connection failu re was introduced and verified. It replaced the original uplift calculation process, which estimates a decrease in damage at high velocities due to exce ssive sheathing panel loss from uplift. The vulnerability curve produced from the revamped routine exhibited monotonic behavior as desired. A universal damage model file was created th at would encompass all simulati on variables, including region, roof type, and wall construction material. Finally, a duo of menu functions were designed that could call simulation runs in succession, and eliminate user supervision of the simulation process. Data points from a damage survey of the 2004 hurricane season were plotted with the Model results of weak and strong mitigati on. The strong mitigation simulation results corresponded well to the expected loss for newl y-constructed homes. Weak mitigation results were somewhat conservative in comparison to da ta points from older constructed homes (1994 to 2001 building codes). This is satisfactory because the models weak mitigation model is meant to emulate a residence of more age, implying w eaker performance of the roof components. The development of a commercial Hurricane Loss Projection Model was initiated with a literature review and methodology fo rmulation. Research produced the characteristics of debris impact, including liftoff and impact energy estimati ons. Debris was classified into four groups,

PAGE 83

83 and relevant properties of each group were discus sed. The information provided is a formulation of statistical values to be us ed. Component strength of EIFS wa s also discussed, providing a relation between base coat thickness and mean failure energy. Glass, types of construction, material variations, and impact energy breakage were discussed. Completing the initial version of the commerc ial model requires further investigation. Building construction statistics for the Southeaste rn United States would need to be obtained, such as building height distri bution, building area per floor, and floor layout geometry. The statistics could be obtained from development aut horities in various cities in the Southeast. The objective of conducting these building studies is to obtain some statis tical parameters that can be linked to normal-distribution si mulation of these properties. Modeling an urban neighborhood effectively will the pave the way to crea ting a successful debris impact model.

PAGE 84

84 APPENDIX CHASE TUTORIAL This appendix serves to instruct the reader how to use the Chase software to design a deployment layout. It will provide some examples to serve as a walk-through of the program. Example 1 This example will walk the reader through the procedure to creating the storm path spreadsheet, loading the program, and creating the KML file for use in GE. Storm Path Spreadsheet File The process begins when the program calls the file in a format using the storms name and season. The file name is made by concatena ting the hurricane name and hurricane season, without delimiter. For example, Hurricane Jeanne from the 2004 season should be named Jeanne2004.xls. Open the spreadsheet file. The spreadsheet is made from scratch, using information available on the NOAA website. Storm center latit ude and longitude are posted every six hours on the website. Storm path latitude information should be written into the third column, and longitude information should be written in the fourth column. It is important that the number of latitude and longitude are equal. Information in the other columns will be ignored. See Figure A1 for a screenshot of the contents of a t ypical spreadsheet ready for utilization. Initiating Chase Program Once the spreadsheet program has been created, start the Chase program by clicking on the file Chase.exe. An additional folder containi ng system files will be created in the root directory. The Chase GUI window will load up for input. Refer to Figure A2 for a screenshot of the contents of the Chase root directory after decompression. Also, Figure A3 displays the main Chase GUI window.

PAGE 85

85 Loading Hurricane Track Now that the Chase GUI has been loaded, the program is ready to input the hurricane name and season to load the track. Also, be sure to lo ad the state where you exp ect the storm to make landfall. Once you have chosen the correct info rmation, click on the Load Track button. A window should be displayed with the states contours and the load ed storm path. Notice the x-axis displays the longitude values, and y-axis displays the latitude values, in degrees. Also, notice that a value pops up in th e Landfall Heading box, which is the storms direction when the eyewall center intersect s the coastline. The text window on the bottom left corner should say Track loaded successfully. See Figure A4 for this step of the process. Loading Deployment Layout The next step is to input how many to wers you want to deploy. Suppose our test deployment will include five towers in the Cannonball Run layout. Suppose also you want the towers spaced at 1-mile intervals. Assume that the storms radius to maximum winds is 10 miles, and the inland distance we want to deploy is 8 miles. By defau lt, the Cannonball Run is selected at Chase initialization, so you will not need to change that setting. Y ou may use the increment and decrement buttons, or manually input the va lues. Once Chase is displaying the information you want, click on the Load Layout button, and wait for the layout window to display. You should see the storms radius to maximum winds path in red, and the storm cluster centered on the offset path. The cluster center will be indicated by a blue circle, and the towers will be indicated by green stars. All the deploymen ts information is repeated in a yellow text box at the top right corn er of the figure. In the Chase GUI window, the tangent heading w ill indicate the directio n that the storm is heading when the storm passes through the tower cluster center. Additionally, a list of the towers locations will be seen in the Tower Lo cations box, in terms of latitude and longitude.

PAGE 86

86 The text window should now say Layout loaded su ccessfully. This step can be visualized in the Figure A5. Creating KML File If the deployment is consistent with the info rmation you wanted, the next step is to click on the Write KML button. You will know the file was written correctly when the text window says KML file written successfully. Double-ch eck that the file was created by looking the Chase root directory. There, you should find a file that is called FCMP-Hurricane Jeanne-2004Cannonball Run. Figure A6 displays the Chase GUI window with the satisfactory message. Figure A7 presents the Chase root director y after the KML file has been created. Loading KML File Now that the deployment layout has been created, and the KML file written with the deployment details, open up Google Earth. On ce loaded, you may locate the KML file just created, then click and hold on the file. With th e first mouse button pressed, drag the mouse over into the GE interface, and under the mouse pointer you will see a small gray box appear. Let go of the mouse button, and GE will be instructed to load the KML file just created. When loaded, the camera will zoom out, or in, so that the storm path and max winds path will be maximized in the window. See Figure A8 for the typical vi ew after the Chase KML has been loaded. The folder structure can be seen in the sidebar to the left. A checkbox should be marked to the left of the folder icon, next to a box with a plus sign. Click on this plus sign to see the contents of this folder. There should be th ree subfolders: Cannonball Run, Storm Track, and Radius to Maximum Winds. Each can be individually turned off if you wish. To zoom in closer to where the towers have been deployed, expand the Cannonball Run subfolder. In there you will find a series of to wer placemarks and subfolders. The subfolders called Tower contain the polygon information used to represent the instrumentation towers.

PAGE 87

87 Click on any one of the tower placemarks, and GE will zoom in to its location. Allow the imagery to update and load completely. You shoul d also see a window app ear that contains the name of the placemark and its GPS coordinates. Refer to Figure A9 for a screenshot of GE displaying this information. Feel free to zoom in closer on any of the towers to observe the land around its proposed deployment position. Be aware of its possible su rroundings: residential co mmunities, vegetation, parks, bodies of water, airports, highways, school s, or warehouses. The key to determining an effective layout lies in choosi ng the inland distance and cluster sp acing such that every tower is likely to be placed somewhere within open terrain. Bear in mind that the scale of the tower in GE is grossly exaggerated, but may deceive the user as to the size of the open area in the vicinity of the tower. Refer to Figure A10 to view a closeup of the tower and the vicinity it lies in. Example 2 The second example will involve integrating a Blue Tarp deployment with a Red Rover deployment. We will load the track for Hurricane Jeanne, and coordinate a tower position for each of two residential homes retrofitted for our pressure sensor instrumentation. The remaining towers will be deployed perp endicular to the storm path. The Chase program is not designed to create mixed deployments. However, we will accomplish this by creating two KML files, one for the Blue Tarp portion of the deployment, and Red Rover for the second portion. Loading Hurricane Jeanne Track Locate the 2004 Jeanne hurricane track in the Ch ase directory. Make sure that Florida is selected as the state chosen for deployment. C lick on the Load Track button to verify that the track has been loaded successfully.

PAGE 88

88 Blue Tarp Deployment Suppose that the deployment for this storm will involve some nearby retrofitted homes. Particularly, the Smith home and Jones home are ve ry close to the projected path of the storm. Suppose that FCMP decides to deploy a tower close to each of these homes. First, a little research on Google Earth gives us the GPS c oordinates of the Samples and Ridgely home. Putting the street ad dresses provides us not only w ith an aerial of the home and neighborhood, but also the prec ise location as to where th e towers may be deployed. In the Chase GUI window, select the Blue Ta rp setting. Type in the GPS coordinates for the towers into the Latitude and Longitude edit boxes. When finished, click on the Update Next button to append the list. Do this for the Jones and Smith home. When completed, click on the Load Layout button to visualize the layout Then click on the Write KML button to complete the design process in Chase. Figure A11 displays the completed Blue Tarp design process. Red Rover Deployment To finish the layout design, click on the Red Rover button to change the layout setting. Select three towers, 12 statute miles to maximum winds, eight statute miles inland, and a cluster spacing of one statute mile. Click on the Load Layout button to verify the tower locations. Finally, create the KML file. Refer to Figure A12 for a visualization of the completed Red Rover layout design process. Deployment Integration The final process is to combine the towe r deployments, and is begun by loading Google Earth. Drag and drop both KML files located in the Chase root directory. Finally, observe both deployments together in Figure A13.

PAGE 89

89 Figure A-1. Projected Path Spreadsheet. Figure A-2. Chase Root Directory.

PAGE 90

90 Figure A-3. Initial Chase GUI Window. Figure A-4. Loaded Hurricane Track.

PAGE 91

91 Figure A-5. Loaded Deployment Layout. Figure A-6. Written KML File.

PAGE 92

92 Figure A-7. Chase Root Di rectory after Completion. Figure A-8. Loaded KML in Google Earth.

PAGE 93

93 Figure A-9. Info Box of Selected Tower. Figure A-10. Google Earth Cl ose-up of FCMP Tower.

PAGE 94

94 Figure A-11. Completed Blue Tarp Process and Chase GUI. Figure A-12. Completed Red R over Process and Chase GUI.

PAGE 95

95 Figure A-13. Google Earth Screen shot of Mixed Deployment.

PAGE 96

96 LIST OF REFERENCES American Forest & Paper Association, Inc. National Design Specification: Design Values for Wood Construction Supplement Washington, D.C.: American Forest & Paper Association, 2005. Applied Research Associates. HAZUS Wind Loss Estimation Methodology Raleigh, North Carolina: Applied Research Associates, 2000. American Society of Civil Engineers. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and other Structures (ASCE 7-02) Reston Virginia: American Society of Civil Engineers, 2002. Cheple, Marilou, and Patrick H. Huelman. Lite rature Review of Exterior Insulation Finish Systems and Stucco Finishes. University of Minnesota Cold C limate Housing Program 15 February 2000. 1 February 2007 http://www.state.mn.us/mn/externa lDocs/Commerce/Stucco_Study_111302112348_Stuc co.pdf Cope, Anne D. Predicting the Vulnerability of Typical Residential Buildings to Hurricane Damage. Ph. D. Dissertation, Gainesville, Florida: University of Florida Press, 2004. Gurley, Kurt. Post 2004 Hurricane Field Surveya n Evaluation of the Relative Performance of the Standard Building Code and the Florida Building Code. Florid a Building Commission April 2006. 1 February 2007 http://www.dca.state.fl.us/FBC/co mmission/FBC_0606/Summary_Briefing.pdf Lampo, Richard G., and Jonathon Trovillion. Use of Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems on U.S. Army Facilities. Exterior Insulation Finish Systems: Materials, Properties and Performance (STP 1269). Ed. Peter E. Nelson and Richard E. Kroll. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: American Society fo r Testing and Materials, 1996. Lampo, Richard G., and Jonathon Trovillion. Per formance of Class PB and Class PM Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems under Various Impact Loadings. Development, Use, and Performance of Exterior Insula tion and Finish Systems (STP 1187) Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: American Society fo r Testing and Materials, 1995. Lee, Brian E., and John Willis. Vulnerability of Fully Glazed High-Rise Buildings in Tropical Cyclones. Journal of Architectural Engineering June 2002. 1 February 2007 http://scitation.aip.org/getpdf/servlet/G etPDFServlet?filetype=pdf&id=JAEIED00000800 0002000042000001&idtype=cvips&prog=normal Minor, Joseph E., and H. Scott Norville. Des ign of Window Glass fo r Lateral Pressures. Journal of Architectural Engineering September 2006. 1 February 2007 http://scitation.aip.org/getpdf/servlet/G etPDFServlet?filetype=pdf&id=JAEIED00001200 0003000116000001&idtype=cvips&prog=normal

PAGE 97

97 Saxe, Timothy J., Richard A. Behr, Joseph E. Minor, Paul A. Kremer, and Lokeswarappa R. Dharani. Effects of Missile Size and Glass Type on Impact Resist ance of Sacrificial Ply Laminated Glass. Journal of Architectural Engineering March 2002. 1 February 2007 http://scitation.aip.org/getpdf/servlet/G etPDFServlet?filetype=pdf&id=JAEIED00000800 0001000024000001&idtype=cvips&prog=normal Simiu, Emil, and Robert H. Scanlan. Wind Effects on Structures. New York, New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1996. Suiker, Akke S., Ernest T. Selig, and Raymond Fre nkel. Static and Cyclic Tri-axial Testing of Ballast and Sub-ballast. Journal of Geotechnical and Ge o-environmental Engineering June 2005. 1 February 2007 http://scitation.aip.org/getpdf/servlet/G etPDFServlet?filetype=pdf&id=JAEIED00000800 0001000024000001&idtype=cvips&prog=normal

PAGE 98

98 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Felix was born and raised in Miami, Florid a. In high school, he enrolled in various Advanced Placement courses, represented hi s high school in numerous mathematics competitions, and played saxophone in his school jazz, symphonic, and marching band. He graduated in the top 3 percent of his high school class at G. Holmes Bra ddock Senior High as an AP Scholar with Distinction. A recipient of the Florida Bright Futures Scholarship, Felix attended Florida International University before transferring to University of Florida. As an undergraduate student, he participated in many engineering organizations and competitions, including the American Society of Civil Engine ering Conference. He completed a double major in December 2005, earning a bachelors degree in civil and coastal engineering and in mathematics. For his graduate studies, Felix stud ied under the direction of Dr. Kurt Gurley, and assisted in various hurricane deployments, in cluding wind observation tower setup and pressure instrumentation projects the Flor ida Coastal Monitoring Program. His primary interests lie in hurricane damage mitigation, and structural mechanics.


Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0021020/00001

Material Information

Title: Hurricane Damage Mitigation: Field Deployment Strategies and Residential-Vulnerability Modeling
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0021020:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0021020/00001

Material Information

Title: Hurricane Damage Mitigation: Field Deployment Strategies and Residential-Vulnerability Modeling
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0021020:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text





HURRICANE DAMAGE MITIGATION:
FIELD DEPLOYMENT STRATEGIES AND
RESIDENTIAL-V/ULNERABLITY MODELING




















By

FELIX F. RODRIGUEZ


A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ENGINEERING

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

2007

































O 2007 Felix F. Rodriguez


































I would like to dedicate this thesis to my family, whom without this reality would never have
become a dream. This paper will also be dedicated to Dr. Kurt Gurley and Dr. Forrest Masters,
for inspiring me to accomplish things I never thought could be done.









ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Thanks to my family, advisors, and fellow students for the help and guidance throughout

my academic career; this accomplishment could not have been completed without their help.












TABLE OF CONTENTS


page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............. ...............4.....


LIST OF TABLES ............. .....__. ...............7....


LIST OF FIGURES .............. ...............8.....


AB S TRAC T ............._. .......... ..............._ 10...


CHAPTER


1 INTRODUCTION ................. ...............11.......... ......


2 CHASE: TOWER DEPLOYMENT SOFTWARE ................ ...............13........... ...


Introducti on ................. .. .. .......... ...............13.......
Tower Deployment Interactive Tool .............. ...............14....
Red Rover Deployment Strategy ................. ...............15................
Cannonball Run Deployment Strategy ................. ...............15................
Ground Zero Deployment Strategy .............. ...............16....
Blue Tarp Deployment Strategy ................. ...............16................
Chase Software ................ ...............17.................
Chase M ethodology ................. ...............19.......... .....

Input Variables .............. ...............19....
Load Track Button ................. ...............21........... ....

Load Layout Button ................. ...............22........... ....
W rite KM L Button .............. ...............23....
Conclusion ................ ...............24.................


3 NEW RESIDENTIAL HURRICANE LOSS MODEL ......___ ...... .. ................31


Introducti on ................. ...............31.................
Hurricane Loss M odel .............. ...............33....

Housing Trends Study .............. ...............34....
Statistical Model of Hurricane............... ..............3

Damage Survey Study .............. ... .............. .........3
Updated and Improved Hurricane Loss Model .............. ...............37....
New Roof Layout ................. ...............37................
New Truss Layout ................ .... ...............39.
Model Calibration and Verification............... ..............4
M odel Consolidation .............. ...............43....
M enu Creation ................ ...............45.................
Conclusion ................ ...............48.................












4 DEVELOPMENT OF COMMERCIAL HURRICANE LOSS MODEL .............. ...............57


Introducti on............._ .........__ ............_ ..........5
Effects of Wind on Multi-Story Buildings ..........._...... __ ....__ ........._......59
Debris Im pact .............. ...............59....
W ater Intrusion ................. ...............60.................

Facade Dam age .................... ............ ...............6
Fundamentals of Developing the Hurricane Loss Model ................ ......... ................62
Modeling Debris Impact............... ...............62.
Modeling Vulnerable Cladding ................. ...............66................
Modeling Methodology ................. ...............70.......... .....
Conclusion ................. ...............74.......... .....


5 CONCLU SION................ ..............8


Hurricane Damage Mitigation ................ ...............81........... ....
Chase softw are............... ..... .. ... ..... .. .. ................8

Computational Model of Structural Vulnerability to Hurricane Winds ................ ...............82

APPENDIX


CHASE TUTORIAL .............. ...............8 4....


Example 1 .............. .. ..... .. ..... ...........8
Storm Path Spreadsheet File............... ...............84..
Initiating Chase Program ................. ...............84........... ....
Loading Hurricane Track .............. ...............85....
Loading Deployment Layout................ ...............85
Creating KM L File .............. ...............86....
Loading KML File............... ...............86..
Example 2 .................. ....... .. ........8
Loading Hurricane Jeanne Track ................. ...............87................
Blue Tarp Deployment .............. ...............88....
Red Rover Deployment ................. ...............88........... ....
Deployment Integration............... ..............8

LIST OF REFERENCES ................. ...............96................


BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .............. ...............98....










LIST OF TABLES

Table page

3-1 Model Calibration Points ................ ...............50................

3-2 Input Variables to Consolidated Damage Model ................. ...............50........... ..











LIST OF FIGURES


Figure page

2-1 Florida Coastal Monitoring Program Instrumentation Tower. ............. .....................2

2-2 Red Rover Deployment in Google Earth. .............. ...............26....

2-3 Cannonball Run Deployment in Google Earth. ............. ...............27.....

2-4 Ground Zero Deployment in Google Earth. ............. ...............27.....

2-5 Blue Tarp Deployment in Google Earth. ............. ...............28.....

2-6 Multiple Proposed Deployments in Google Earth. .............. ...............28....

2-7 Main Chase GUI Window. ............. ...............29.....

2-8 Load Track Process Output ................. ...............29........... ...

2-9 Load Layout process ................. ...............30................

3-1 Flow Chart of Florida Hurricane Loss Model ................. ...............51..............

3-2 Diagram of Typical Residential Home & Components ................. .........................51

3-3 Typical Sheathing Panel Pattern ................ ...............52........... ...

3-4 W ind Load Cases. ............. ...............52.....

3-5 Original Truss Vulnerability Curve. ............. ...............53.....

3-6 Typical Truss Layouts................ ...............54

3-7 Comparison of Original and New Truss Vulnerability Curves. ................... ...............54

3-8 Comparison of Vulnerability Curves to Damage Survey Points and Best-Fit Curve.......55

3-9 Comparison of Weak and Strong Models, Old and New Building Code Damage
Survey Data Points. ............ _...... ._ ...............56...

3-10 Example Input File for File Menu. ............. ...............56.....

4-1 EIFS-clad Building Damaged by Frances and Jeanne, Satellite Beach, Florida. .............79

4-3 Flow Chart for Commercial Hurricane Loss Model Debris Impact Model ....................80

A-1 Proj ected Path Spreadsheet. ........._.._.. ...._... ...............89...












A-2 Chase Root Directory ................. ...............89........ .....

A-3 Initial Chase GUI Window. ............. ...............90.....


A-4 Loaded Hurricane Track. ............. ...............90.....


A-5 Loaded Deployment Layout. ............. ...............91.....

A-6 Written KML File. ............. ...............91.....


A-7 Chase Root Directory after Completion. ............. ...............92.....


A-8 Loaded KML in Google Earth. ............. ...............92.....

A-9 Info Box of Selected Tower. .............. ...............93....


A-10 Google Earth Close-up of FCMP Tower. ............. ...............93.....


A-11 Completed Blue Tarp Process and Chase GUI. .............. ...............94....


A-12 Completed Red Rover Process and Chase GUI. .............. ...............94....


A-13 Google Earth Screenshot of Mixed Deployment. ....._._._ ......._.. ... ...._.........95









Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Master of Engineering

HURRICANE DAMAGE MITIGATION:
FIELD DEPLOYMENT STRATEGIES AND
RESIDENTIAL-V/ULNERABLITY MODELING
By

Felix F. Rodriguez

May 2007

Chair: Kurt Gurley
Major: Civil Engineering



This document discusses various contributions to research in hurricane damage mitigation.

A graphical user interface was created to assist the Florida Coastal Monitoring Program in the

deployment of wind observation towers deployed during the landfall of a hurricane. The program

calculates geo-positional coordinates of observation towers based upon terrain properties and

storm characteristics. An updated Florida Hurricane Loss Model was created that re-defined a

load path analysis, and improved the program usability and automation. The improvements

included a model consolidation into one damage model routine, and introduced menu functions.

A literature review of commercial building damage estimation provided information on assessing

damage on multi-story buildings in creating a commercial Florida Hurricane Loss Model. A

methodology was devised that would consider the damage energy of debris for impact modeling,

and the vulnerability of common cladding materials such as exterior insulation Einish systems

and glass.









CHAPTER 1
INTTRODUCTION

Hurricane Damage Mitigation: Hurricanes are of great concern in the Southeast United

States, causing an incredible amount of destruction, necessitating immense preparation.

Understanding the interaction of extreme winds and structures can help find cost effective

mitigation solutions and minimize loss of life and property. The challenge in understanding wind

/ structure interaction is the large degree of uncertainty in both the loading and the structural

response and capacity. The engineer must rely on statistics to estimate probabilities and

expectations of events occurring.

It is the goal of the Florida Coastal Monitoring Program (FCMP) to address the issue of

mitigating wind damage to residential housing by providing field data on the behavior of winds

and wind loading. The data are obtained from installing instrumentation towers near the

intersection of the storm's path and the coastline. The type of information that can be extracted

from these towers depends upon how they are arranged relative to each other and the hurricane.

A program that calculates the coordinates of a proposed formation will facilitate the FCMP team

in deploying towers quickly and precisely. The program is simple to understand and use and

provides visual assistance to the team in its deployment operations.

Another aspect of hurricane mitigation that FCMP is active with involves modeling and

estimating damage of residential homes from hurricane winds. The original Florida Hurricane

Loss Model (FHLM) program was constructed as a Monte Carlo simulation program that

simulates random loads and component strengths, and records the instances of failure. Many

changes and revisions have been made to the original code, transforming the program into one

that provides more realistic results and improve organization. New roof loading, sheathing panel

failure and truss connection failure methods were created to replace the original algorithms. The










program was also in need of consolidation, which motivated the creation of one file capable of

harnessing the entire simulation process for all models. Finally, additional features were added to

assist the user in inputting information in an efficient manner. These features are capable of

instructing simulation runs to minimize user supervision. Collectively, the new additions make

the physical damage component of the hurricane loss prediction model more accurate, efficient,

and primed for expansion to commercial applications.

Recently, FCMP has been assigned to develop a damage estimation model for commercial

structures similar to the residential model. Differences in residential versus commercial require

the development of an entirely new model. Preliminary work has been done to initiate this

process. A literature review of information pertinent to high-rise construction and the main

components that are subj ect to wind damage has also been included in this document. The

information gathered is assembled to provide a method to identify the threshold of damage and

quantify the probabilistic strength of components.









CHAPTER 2
CHASE: TOWER DEPLOYMENT SOFTWARE

Introduction

The main objective of research efforts has been to understand the behavior of hurricane

winds as they interact with land and the built infrastructure. These massive storms threaten life

and property, and particularly any storm of Category 3 or stronger can generate billions of

dollars in losses. It is known that a positive correlation exists between wind speed and the

quantity of damage caused by a storm. An accurate calibration of wind to damage is a

complicated process that presents many difficulties. This chapter discusses efforts to quantify

this hurricane wind behavior, in particular the speed, turbulence and direction of winds over

land.

The Florida Coastal Monitoring Program (FCMP) is an effort to measure and model wind

behavior during storm landfall. During a storm, FCMP teams deploy wind observation towers in

key locations that will assist meteorologists, engineers and scientists in determining wind

intensity.

Much information has been derived from this data collection program. The data is used for

the calculation of various statistical and stochastic parameters used to define wind behavior,

including the cross-correlation, auto-spectrum, and turbulence length scales. These parameters

are used to better understand the behavior of the wind during the passing of a hurricane. This

information is also used to estimate dynamic wind pressures on structures, a maj or consideration

in the design of buildings and other structures along the coastal United States.

The goal of FCMP has been to position the towers as close to the location of maximum

windspeed as possible. Currently, the locations for deployment of the five towers are determined

within several hours before landfall, based on the current predicted path of the storm. The










placement of the towers relative to the shoreline, populated areas, and each other depends upon

the impact region and storm characteristics as it approaches. Every storm results in a different

arrangement of the towers, reflecting the specific parameters of that event. However, there were

no previous formalized procedures or tools that allow the teams to investigate multiple

deployment strategies.

This chapter presents an interactive tool that was developed to allow the FCMP

deployment crews to investigate multiple deployment scenarios. With the advent of Google

Earth (GE), it has become very easy to visualize not just the path of the hurricane, but also the

characteristics of the terrain, the population densities in its path, and other parameters that can

influence the decision that an FCMP team makes regarding tower placement. The creation of this

tool all ow s a flexible deployment strategy that c an b e adapted to conti nuou sly -changing

conditions. The benefit is greater control of the experiment, and an improved opportunity to learn

more per event.

Tower Deployment Interactive Tool

There would be many benefits of using an interactive tool to assist the tower deployment

design. It allows a visualization of a proposed deployment layout, which will help the team

determine the optimal position of a deployed tower. It could allow the team to locate an open

patch of land near the proposed location, which would eliminate crucial time and resources spent

in search of a satisfactory position. Figure 2-1 provides an example of what a satisfactory

position for a tower would be. Notice that the terrain is open, and the tower is located far from

any wind obstructions, such as buildings, large trees, etc.

Another benefit of having an interactive tool is that it facilitates comparing different

proposed deployments. Being able to visualize multiple potential deployment layouts side by









side allows FCMP to determine which tower deployment layout would be most favorable for the

given approaching storm and existing safe operational window of time.

Thus far the visualization tool has incorporated four basic deployment strategies that have

been used in previous deployments. These are referred to as Red Rover, Cannonball Run,

Ground Zero, and Blue Tarp. These strategies are discussed next. However, the visualization tool

is designed to incorporate other strategies as the FCMP teams develop them. In each of the

strategies described below, the user has the ability to change many parameters, from storm path,

size and speed, to the desired spacing between towers. The interactive capabilities will be

discussed after the four basic deployment options are discussed.

Red Rover Deployment Strategy

Red Rover is a layout in which the towers are set up perpendicular to the proj ected path of

the hurricane. This is advantageous when the path of the storm is unclear, or when no significant

infrastructure is farther inland. The concept is to spread the instrumentation over a large area to

maximize the possibility of capturing extreme winds from at least one instrument. Typically the

idea is to deploy this layout fairly close to shore, as the wind speeds vary greatly along the coast

during landfall. Figure 2-2 provides a GE screenshot of a typical Red Rover deployment.

Cannonball Run Deployment Strategy

Cannonball Run is a strategy designed to answer questions about the storm rate of

deterioration after landfall. As a storm makes landfall, the windspeeds in general decay as the

storm begins to lose strength and the ground level winds are hindered by terrain. The maps used

to determine design windspeeds in ASCE 7 incorporate this concept via contours of decreasing

design wind speed. This deployment will help quantify, calibrate and verify this concept.

The towers are to be placed along the projected path of the storm, starting at the coast and

moving inland many miles. For this deployment strategy to work successfully, it is necessary that









the storm's path be well defined. This is crucial because deploying towers in a line parallel to the

path will result in a "hit or miss" situation, providing low chance of obtaining extreme wind data

if the path is not well defined. Inland terrain features are an important consideration, as the ideal

placement for any given tower is in a locally open exposure. Data from towers in open exposure

are more readily extrapolated to a larger area, as the data is not polluted by the effects of very

nearby objects. See Figure 2-3 for a GE representation of the Cannonball Run deployment.

Ground Zero Deployment Strategy

In some cases it may be desirable to cluster the towers in a circle around an area where

the maximum winds are expected. The presence of a group of towers in a small area helps to

quantify the difference in wind over small area due to both storm features and local terrain

effects. Post damage investigations of damage from hurricane winds show that significant

changes in damage intensity can take place over relatively small areas, particularly near the

center of the path of the storm. Essentially, the Ground Zero strategy is useful for understanding

local wind effects that produce these observed differences.

This deployment strategy is useful when the path of the storm is well-defined, to capture

a point, hopefully, at or near the band of maximum winds. It is also more desirable when the

hurricane has a large eyewall and is very intense. Refer to Figure 2-4 for an example of the

Ground Zero deployment. The optimal deployment has towers on both the strong and weak sides

of the storm (in the figure, north and south of the westward moving eyewall, respectively).

Blue Tarp Deployment Strategy

The fourth and last tower deployment layout involves one similar to the Ground Zero

layout, but differs in that the location of the cluster of towers is determined by the placement of

the FCMP's instrumented houses. These houses are collecting the dynamic wind pressure on the

roof. The towers provide the approach wind field that produces those wind loads. This layout is









most useful when the storm is expected to pass through a well built-up suburban region near the

coastline. The information obtained from the towers in this setting can be combined with the data

measured from the instrumented houses to correlate wind speed with pressure on the roofs of

one- and two-story residential homes. See Figure 2-5 for an example of a Blue Tarp layout.

Chase Software

Appendix A provides a detailed walk-through of the use of Chase software. The next

section discusses the basic inputs and operations of Chase.

The Chase program will help facilitate the tower deployment process by calculating

possible deployment layouts based on user input. It is used to compare and contrast between

different layouts, and determine the optimal placements in each scenario. In the future, a layer of

terrain exposure information could be combined with aerial photographs and the proj ected storm

path to determine a specific location for each tower. This information is quite feasible to obtain

with the help of GIS technology software.

This process can be indispensable to the entire tower deployment operation, saving

valuable time and resources in the period before storm landfall. The teams instructed to deploy

towers would not need to search around for a satisfactory spot, and instead can rely on the

information provided by the aerial photographs to identify suitable patches of land. The

operation could be capable of on-the-fly changes in deployment plan based upon an evolving

storm behavior. This is crucial to improving FCMP's tower deployment strategies, because the

optimal strategy can change continuously over the span of a couple of house before landfall. The

process would end in the determination of a set of GPS coordinates that would represent the

positions of the deployed towers.

The Chase program can also be used by partner researchers such as NOAA atmospheric

scientists to help determine which deployment strategy would be most useful. The program is










simple enough so that an official, engineer, student or layman would not be confused in its

mechanics. This is achieved by a stratification of various input variables, and organization of the

entire process into three easy steps. The program produces an output a file containing

information that, together with visualization of existing terrain exposure and aerial photographs,

could be displayed to anyone instantaneously with an interface such as Google Earth.

The Chase program is a graphical user interface (GUI) written in MATLAB, and compiled

so that it may stand alone as an executable program. It is designed so that the necessary inputs

can be easily obtained. The process, split into three steps, can be initiated by pressing buttons for

each one. The program ultimately calculates the GPS coordinates of each tower placement

according to the values of the input variables chosen. This was achieved by use of the mapping

toolbox, a library of sub-functions that manipulate and work with distances on the surface of the

earth. On the surface of the earth, straight lines in the "plane" become arcs with the center

coinciding with the Earth's. A two-dimensional coordinate set in this context refers to longitude

and latitude. Distances are thus calculated along this arc, eliminating the need for survey

measurement on the eve of hurricane landfall.

The output of the program is a KML file that may be input into Google Earth (GE). Google

Earth is quickly becoming a popular tool for locating landmarks around the world. This output in

KML format can literally be dragged and dropped into the GE interface, and will be visualized

instantaneously. This makes the tower deployment viewable to FCMP deployment teams.

The KML file contains information about the storm's projected path, a path offset from the

eyewall representing the radius to maximum winds (eyewall radius), and the locations of the

proposed towers. It is possible for the user to input various proposed tower layouts










simultaneously in GE, prior to choosing the desired layout. Figure 2-6 displays a GE screenshot

of multiple tower deployments viewed simultaneously.

Chase Methodology

The program' s input variables are dependent upon the characteristics of the hurricane and

the desired layout geometry. It requires an Excel fie containing the proj ected path, downloaded

from the National Hurricane Center path proj sections. These Hiles are updated every six hours

prior to land fall. Three buttons trigger main routines which encompass the entire layout design

process.

The optimal deployment strategy is a function of storm behavior and the area to be

impacted. From characteristics such as translation speed, size and intensity, we determine if the

path is well defined, and thus which strategies would be best to deploy. Depending on the terrain

characteristics and nearby infrastructure, we further determine which deployment layout to use,

what tower cluster spacing is feasible, and what inland distance we would like to deploy the

towers at.

Input Variables

Refer to Figure 2-7 for a screenshot of the Chase GUI window. The first set of variables to

initiate the Chase program is the hurricane name and season. Together, they will instruct Chase

to look for an Excel file containing the proj ected path of the storm. The proj ected path will be

input and combined with the state chosen to locate the proj ected path as it intersects the coast

and makes landfall. If a state is chosen whose boundary does not intersect the proj ected path, an

error will display on the text window.

With a storm track and state chosen, the user is then able to select the general layout

geometry for deployment. The choices are the four layouts proposed Red Rover, Cannonball










Run, Ground Zero and Blue Tarp. Based upon the next set of input variables, the layout details

will be selected, and the deployment layout will be created.

Another input crucial for optimal tower deployment will be the radius to maximum winds

and the inland distance. The radius of maximum winds can be obtained from an independent

source (NOAA), and input into Chase to establish a path offset from the eyewall center. Figures

2-2 through 2-6 represent this as a colored swath for the storm path. The inland distance input

represents the center of the tower deployment along the radius to maximum winds path. With the

center point of the tower cluster calculated, the set of coordinates for the towers can be obtained.

The input to the deployment layout also includes the number of towers to be used. This can

be any number from one to six. The tower cluster distance will be another input, and can be

edited by direct typing into the value box, or can be incremented using the plus or minus buttons.

The value of increment (or decrement) is 0.25 distance units, depending upon the units chosen. If

the deployment strategy is Red Rover or Cannonball Run, this tower cluster distance is literally

the distance between adj acent towers. For Ground Zero, the tower cluster distance will be the

radius of the circle the towers will be positioned around. The cluster center coordinates is

irrelevant to the Blue Tarp strategy, because it is one which does not place the towers in any set

arrangement.

The Units Multiplier box eliminates the user' s need to resort to some universal unit. One

can choose which unit of distance is most convenient in figuring out the inland distance, radius

to maximum winds and tower cluster distance. By default, the choice of units will be set to

statute miles, but the Chase software is capable of calculating distances in terms of nautical miles

and kilometers. A radio box on the GUI window selects the units desired for determining the










layout geometry. Internally, this will assign a value to the Units Multiplier variable, which

converts all distances to be inputted into statute miles.

The Longitude and Latitude edit boxes are used with the Blue Tarp setting to append the

list of individual tower coordinates. Since the Blue Tarp strategy is a method for deploying

individual towers in no precise arrangement, they must be inputted one at a time. Once the

coordinates have been typed, the "Update Next" button will append the list. If a mistake was

made, clicking on the "Erase Last" button will erase the last tower inputted. Notice that as the list

is appended, the value in the Number of Towers box is adjusted accordingly.

The Tower Locations box provides a list of the GPS coordinates for the set of towers that

make up the deployment strategy. This is relevant to all deployment strategies, but only in the

Blue Tarp can this list be changed. Verifying the information in this box is the last step to

creating the KML file.

Some other buttons on the GUI window are not input windows, but serve miscellaneous

functions. At some point during the design process, a value may pop up in the Landfall Heading

box, and also in the Tangent Heading box. These values help the user understand what direction

the storm will be going after it makes landfall. The Zoom Slider helps the user view the

deployment layout father out or closer in. A message window helps the user stay aware of the

status of the deployment design process. It will make the user aware that any of the three main

routines carried out successfully, or it could warn the user that an input variable needs to be

addressed to proceed.

Load Track Button

Once the hurricane name and season have been identified, and the state has been chosen

from the pull-down menu, clicking on the "Load Track" button will provide the user with a map

of the Southeastern area of the United States and the storm proj ected path.









The "Load Track" process involves retrieving the input necessary to begin the tower

deployment process. The boundaries of the states are vectorized into longitude and latitude

vectors. A user-created Excel file containing the path is located, and is compiled into the

MATLAB environment. The proj ected landfall point will be defined as the intersection point of

these two sets of coordinates, and is calculated using sub-functions in MATLAB contained in the

mapping toolbox. Next, the landfall heading is calculated using another mapping sub-function.

The routine calculates the azimuth based upon two sets of longitude and latitude. The result is

displayed in the Landfall Heading box. The value is taken to the clockwise angle of rotation from

the north direction. Usually, for a storm intersecting the Florida coast, the landfall heading will

be somewhere 270 and 360 degrees.

Finally, the results are plotted. The user will see a map of the state boundary and the

storm's proj ected path. Refer to Figure 2-8 for a screenshot of a loaded track using Chase.

Load Layout Button

When the "Load Layout" button is pressed, a routine will be triggered to provide the user

with a visual representation of the proposed tower layout. The process will retrieve the values in

the Radius to Maximum Winds box, the Inland Distance box, the Number of Towers box and the

Cluster Distance box for calculation of the tower deployment' s coordinates.

First, an offset path is calculated to determine the Radius to Maximum Winds path. The

original proj ected path, representing the path of the eyewall center, consists of two vectors

representing longitude and latitude coordinates. Each component in these vectors is paired with

the same component in the second vector to provide a coordinate on Earth. The tangent heading

of each coordinate is calculated using a central difference method. From this, the perpendicular

heading is calculated, which is be 90 degrees counter-clockwise from the tangent heading of the

direction the storm is going. If the storm is heading in the northwest direction, this offset path









will be north and east of the projected path. The offset path is drawn a distance away from the

storm path a distance equal to the radius of maximum winds.

Next, a point is located on this path which is determined from the inland distance. That

point will become the center of the tower cluster, and the locations of the towers will be

determined from this center point. The tangent heading of the storm path is calculated at the

center point, along with its perpendicular heading. This will be used to figure out the towers'

positioning. The calculated coordinates of the towers will be stored in two vectors, one

containing longitude and the second latitude values.

If the user calls for a Blue Tarp deployment, the Radius of Maximum Winds path and

cluster center will be defined. However, the vectors containing the towers' longitude and latitude

will be explicitly defined by the user.

The last step of the Load Layout process is to display the location of the towers. The

Radius to Maximum Winds path will be displayed in red over the state contour and storm

proj ected path, as well as the towers in their determined locations. The center of the tower cluster

will be indicated by a blue circle, and the locations of the towers in will be indicated by green

stars. Refer to Figure 9 for an example of a loaded layout.

Write KML Button

The final routine of the Chase software prepares and creates a KML file so that the user

may visualize the deployment in Google Earth. A KML file is text file saved in a KML extension

containing ASCII information that GE reads and interprets. The file defines obj ects such as

polygons and place marks within a folder structure. These obj ects contain many attributes such

as a location on the Earth via GPS coordinates, name tags, look-at information and an obj ect

description. The look-at information provides a tilt and heading that the camera (user view point)









will adjust to when the obj ect is selected. Tag information is provided to help the user understand

what an obj ect represents, and is available when that obj ect is selected.

Information obtained from the GUI window is retained during this routine to create a

unique file for each deployment designed. The Eile name is created from the hurricane's name,

season and deployment layout. Completed text consists of tower information with polygon

representation, eyewall center path information, and radius to maximum winds path information.

Tower information is organized into a folder, one for each tower in the deployment layout.

Each tower is created as an object, with accompanying nametag information, look-at

information, and a corresponding list of polygons that put together represent the tower itself. The

polygons are created in three dimensions and scaled down to an appropriate scale. Each tower' s

polygon group is contained in a separate subfolder.

The storm path information is defined in a separate folder as an open polygon so that the

user may visualize the proj ected path of the storm. The path is outlined in bold black and

extruded to perceive height. The path is labeled to identify the path from farther out.

The radius to maximum winds path is created in a third folder, which contains the offset

path of the expected maximum winds in the hurricane. This path is indicated in red, and will

usually be seen northeast of the storm path.

Conclusion

A program has been created to help FCMP teams make their tower deployment decisions

based on all relevant information. A user-friendly MATLAB GUI provides FCMP staff with an

opportunity to make an easy transition between the proj ected storm path to a set of GPS

coordinates of proposed tower locations. The program presents this information in the form of a

KML text fie which is readable by Google Earth so that anyone with an Internet connection can










be aware of tower deployment plans. Ultimately, Chase can improve how FCMP teams use their

resources and optimize the collection of perishable data under high-pressure circumstances.

There are several improvements possible to improve Chase. The program can be

designed to input translation speeds from the proj ected path to provide an estimated time of

landfall. This may be helpful in providing FCMP a timeframe of when deployments should be

completed. It should also be updated to incorporate land use information to better select specific

tower locations in open terrain. Chase can also be set up to customize the towers' order in

deployment, so that the tower number presented in GE will correspond to the tower number

deployed at that location. The KML file can also be updated to provide a link to the tower's 15-

minute update files on FCMP's website.

A tutorial of the Chase software in the form of examples may be found in Appendix A for

insight into the program procedure.


































Figure 2-1. Florida Coastal Monitoring Program Instrumentation Tower.


Figure 2-2. Red Rover Deployment in Google Earth.

































Figure 2-3. Cannonball Run Deployment in Google Earth.


Figure 2-4. Ground Zero Deployment in Google Earth.


































Figure 2-5. Blue Tarp Deployment in Google Earth.


Figure 2-6. Multiple Proposed Deployments in Google Earth.






























































File Edit Viery Insert Tools Desktop Vdindory Help r

o c~ a a i a i 9 9 ~n,~ i ~ I O ~ i ~ ~


II I

O

~





D--O
h
~ B
[7
n


Figure 2-7. Main Chase GUI Window.


Figure 2-8. Load Track Process Output.





File Edit View Insert Tools Desktop Wdindow Help



Red Rover Hurricanie Frances (2001)

lil Slatelle Miles Inllndli
14 Slatelle Muiles inl M~A WNindlS
5i T,wers.& 1 SlaIleIIC Miles


II1-.


.-,II4


Figure 2-9.


Load Layout process









CHAPTER 3
NEW RESIDENTIAL HURRICANE LOSS MODEL

Introduction

Improving the resistance of residential housing to hurricane winds is driven in part by the

financial impact of such improvements. Property insurance rates are based upon predicted

insured losses, and improvements to design need to be cost-effective to be accepted. The ability

to predict both the physical and financial vulnerability of housing to winds has been improving

in the last decade as the predictive models have grown more sophisticated in their use of

engineering principles and observed data. This chapter addresses modeling (predicting) the

physical damage to residential homes to hurricane winds. A structural vulnerability model was

developed at UF as a component in the Florida Hurricane Loss Model (FHLM) by Dr. Anne

Cope (Cope, 2004). This model has recently been revised to incorporate additional information

on load paths, and to make the architecture more user friendly and adaptable to the rapid influx

of additional field data with each hurricane land fall.

The progressive failure that a home can experience is a process that begins at the top of the

structure, and ends at the foundation. A typical residential home is constructed with a concrete

slab foundation, and wood or masonry walls which harness the building roof trusses and

covering. The covering is made up of plywood sheathing, a water resistant layer, and shingles or

tiles. The roof layout geometry may be gable end, hip, or some combination.

The wind flow pattern depending on the direction of the storm, determines the roof and

wall pressure. The component feeling the most extreme pressure is typically the roof along the

corners and edges where uplift is strong. A roof can be made up of asphalt shingles, which are

flat on the roof, or they can be made of flat or curved ceramic tiles. Numerous documented










damage investigations indicate that the roof cover is among the most vulnerable component of a

home, frequently torn from the roof and becoming air-borne.

Simultaneously, the sheathing panels below the shingles are subj ected to uplift. These

panels can also come off, exposing the trusses underneath and permitting water intrusion.

Without the sheathing, the trusses are vulnerable to toppling.

The loads on the roof are transferred to the walls via the roof to wall connections, which

range from nails in older construction to clips and straps designed to resist hurricane loads in

modern construction. The failure of roof to wall connections can have significant impact on the

resistance of the home against winds.

The windows and openings around the house become vulnerable to the windborne debris

created by roof cover and vegetation, increasing the probability of breaching a home. If a

window or door is penetrated, the inside of the house is subj ect to water intrusion and internal

pressurization, and the home is now experiencing a more vulnerable load scenario.

Each of the components described above (roof cover, sheathing, roof to wall connections,

walls, and windows and openings) can vary in their capacity or ability to resist wind loads. This

is dependent upon the construction practice common at the time the home was built, the quality

of construction, the building codes enforced at the time, the effects of aging of structural

materials, fasteners and connections, and the load sharing among components. It is not possible

to precisely quantify each of these issues for any given home, thus it has been common practice

to model the vulnerability of residential structures in a probabilistic format. Random capacity

values are sampled from an appropriate distribution for a given component, and compared to

randomly assigned loading sampled from a distribution that represents the loading. A Monte










Carlo simulation is then used to produce a statistical assessment of the likelihood of the quantity

of damage to various components to a series of wind speeds and wind directions.

Several such models already exist, including one created at UF by Dr. Anne Cope during

her Ph.D. research program. This chapter discusses upgrades that have been made to her original

model .

Hurricane Loss Model

The model created at UF to predict damage on a residence is known as the physical

damage component of the Florida Hurricane Loss Model (FHLM). In addition to the physical

damage model developed at UF, the FHLM also includes a wind field prediction component, an

internal damage component, and a financial and actuarial component developed by partnering

researchers.

The relation between damage and windspeed is an output to the physical damage model,

and is referred to as the vulnerability curve that is, damage versus windspeed. These curves

vary based upon the construction of the house being modeled (wall type, roof cover type and age,

roof to wall connections, the nailing in the sheathing, the use of shutters on windows, etc.)

The Hurricane Loss Model is an example of a Monte Carlo simulation, useful for tracking

phenomenon with many random variables. For complex systems with many interacting

components, it is typically not possible to derive a closed-form solution relating expected

outcome as a function of the input variables. Monte Carlo simulation is practical when the

interaction between the many variables are non-linear, or if they are described in terms of non-

normal distributions. The advent of computers has also driven the popularity of this method.

A flow chart of the program developed by Dr. Cope can be seen in Figure 3-1. The

fundamental concept is to apply a specified 3-second gust wind speed to the model home. This 3-

second gust represents the peak value experienced by the house for a given storm or period of









time (e.g. one year). The loads from this gust are determined and applied to the structures. Each

of the components of the structure has a load capacity assigned to it (each shingle, each window,

each sheathing panel, etc.), which is compared to the wind load. Those components whose

capacity is exceeded by the load are then damaged. The process is repeated many times, with a

new set of capacities randomly assigned to each new model. After many simulations the output is

a statistical description of the vulnerability of that model home to that wind speed from that

direction. The process is completed for eight different wind directions at each wind speed, and

includes wind speeds every 5 mph from 50 to 250 mph gusts. Figure 3-2 provides a diagram of

all components in a typical residential home considered for damage (Cope, 2004).

Ultimately the output provides the probability of component failure conditioned upon wind

speed and wind direction. The wind field modeling group then provides the probability of these

various wind speeds occurring. A given house model can be varied in many ways to reflect the

differing methods of construction. For example, very weak stapled roof sheathing as well as very

resistant nailed sheathing using modern practice are both options for the model. Unprotected

windows and protected (shuttered) windows can be modeled. Different uplift roof loading is

provided for hip and gable roofs.

Housing Trends Study

Prior to the development of the original model, a study of the construction methods of the

state of Florida provided information to make assumptions about the model. Many counties

throughout Florida provided detailed and thorough information about the structural

characteristics of homes through a database. The study was used to determine, for example,

typical square footage of residential housing.

A building component study was undertaken to asses the strength variability of many parts

composing the fabrication of a house. Sources of information include literature relating results of









laboratory testing, literature from existing vulnerability models such as the FEMA HAZUS

hurricane model, information from damage studies, and manufacturer's information (e.g. roof to

wall connection capacities provided by Simpson Strong Tie, garage door pressure ratings, etc).

Statistical Model of Hurricane

A list of model parameters determine the different permutations of models, such as the

house location (e.g., North, Central Florida), wall material (wood frame or concrete block), roof

type (hip or gable roof), roof to wall connection type (nails, clips, straps), window size,

distribution and protection, and the number of stories.

Identification of failure has its roots in reliability theory; that is, the probability of failure

may be expressed in terms of the loads and resistances of the system under consideration:

P( faihere) = P(R L < 0) MATLAB synthesizes random values using a random number

generator, which is capable of producing random numbers that fit a section of many common

distributions (uniform, Gaussian, lognormal, etc.).

Loads simulated in the Model are based upon guidelines from ASCE-7. Pressure

coefficients are factors used to relate the measured mechanical pressure on a surface to the

velocity pressure: C, =(i p, -l~ pa1 p v' (Simniu, 1996). The pressure is calculated at mean

roof height with unit surface roughness. Different pressure coefficients are used to distinguish

different zones around a house exhibiting unique flow patterns: interior, edge and corner roof

zones; interior and edge wall zone; and windward, leeward and side wall zones. All these factors

taken from ASCE-7 are assumed the mean coefficient values, and the COV is assumed to be

10%. The topography and direction factors are assumed to be unity for the residential model.

Losses identified in the model are conducted by tracking forces down to the ground.

Failure checks commence on the roof, and as the roof cover and sheathing panels are lost, it










affects the truss performance and connection uplift. Because these calculations will be done at

least once per simulation, and assuming there will be thousands of simulations, the computation

speed of these operations becomes very important. After the set of calculations to determine all

failure is completed, the percentage of loss for each component is compiled into a saved file for

further analysis. The model outputs the archives for each windspeed and direction increment.

Damage Survey Study

The occurrence of new observable wind damage data is an important aspect of model

calibration and validation. A survey was conducted to assess the effectiveness of the 2002

Florida Building Code. This survey was motivated by the 2004 hurricane season, in which four

hurricanes (Charley, Frances, Ivan, Jeanne) created observable damage to Florida residential

infrastructure.

Homes affected by these storms were investigated. Information was organized by GIS

technology to create wind swath maps, reporting the highest windspeed experienced in an area.

The regions were stratified to classify homes and their locations. Randomly selected

homeowners for each region were called to authorize our inspection. It included an interview that

gathered information about homeowner evacuation procedures and the amount of damage that

occurred. The surroundings were observed and noted.

The information provided modelers with the opportunity to verify the vulnerability of

homes due to the storms predicted by modeling. The models report expected damage at a

particular windspeed. Statistics obtained from inspections help in calibration of the resistances of

windows, doors, garages, and roof covers (i.e., tiles or shingles). The points created could be

used to reinforce or update the results that were produced by the FHLM.










Updated and Improved Hurricane Loss Model

Since the development of the FHLM (Cope, 2004), additional improvements to simulation

have been considered. These additions are due to an evolution of the thought process in the

model, by a need for a more user-friendly and easily adaptable architecture for the program, and

the need to incorporate additional data on housing performances collected during the 2004 and

2005 hurricane seasons.

The improvements made to the model can be fit into three categories:

* Load path and capacity upgrades;
* Improved architecture to streamline use and further development of the program;
* The creation of a manageable user interface.

The finished product is one that will facilitate the user in many aspects of the simulation

process, including managing the various input variables that go into the program, cataloguing the

various simulation runs, and conducting sensitivity studies.

The rest of this chapter describes the updates made to the UF physical damage component

of the FHLM.

New Roof Layout

The updates commenced with a refinement of the roof layout and geometry. Overall

dimensions of the roof were verified and compared to the original roof layout. These were

determined based upon house dimensions, a 2-ft overhang, and a 5-on-12 roof pitch. The overall

roof area was found to be inconsistent with the original sheathing area matrix. A flattened roof

was drawn in AutoCAD, and a sheathing panel layout was created. The staggered panel pattern

drawn is characteristic of residential home construction, and can be seen in Figure 3-3.

The area of each sheathing panel was obtained in AutoCAD, and a sheathing area matrix

was created for implementation into MATLAB. Each entry in the matrix represents the area of









one sheathing panel on the roof. Panels in the corner, typically cut smaller to fit on the roof, will

have less tributary area.

The process continued with a verification of the pressure coefficients for the original roof

layout. The load cases used to model wind flow from different directions were adapted from

ASCE 7. In the original model, there was no distinction between edge and corner pressure zones.

In reality, corners will experience more uplift than between corners along the edge. There was a

possibility that FHLM was underestimating the roofcover failure. This loading also affects the

sheathing failure and roof-to-wall connection failure.

A new process incorporated three pressure zones for modeling interior, edge, and corner

zones. To model 8 possible load cases where wind is directed at 0 to 360 degrees in 45-degree

increments relative to the house, three load cases were created:

winds perpendicular to the ridgeline;
winds parallel to the ridgeline;
wind cornering the ridgeline at an oblique angle.

For each of these three load cases, the edge zone distance was calculated, based upon

recommendations from ASCE 7 and dependent on the roof s dimensions. Each load case was

drawn up in AutoCAD over the existing sheathing panel layout. The reader may refer to Figure

3-4 for a schematic of the wind load cases on both gable and hip roofs.

The entire roof was then broken down into three areas, and it was observed that some

panels lay in one, two, or even all three pressure zones simultaneously. The overlapping of the

pressure zones with the panel layout made easy the process of determining the overall pressure

on any panel. The pressure coefficients attributed to each sheathing panel became a weight

coefficient based upon its contribution by area from each zone. Finally, an interpolated pressure

coefficient was calculated for each sheathing panel.









Results of using this new roof layout were compared to the original model's results. It

appeared there wasn't much difference between the two, because as ASCE 7 recommends that

the corner and edge zones remain equal, the means and COV's for the edge and corner zones

were set equal in the new FHLM. However, the program is now capable of assuming a higher

corner zone pressure coefficient. The results from new wind tunnel studies of wind pressures on

housing can be easily incorporated.

New Truss Layout

The original truss failure analysis relied upon the sheathing panel load analysis to direct

the uplift damage to connections. As a sheathing panel failed, the pressure on it was set to zero,

and therefore would relieve some uplift pressure on a truss whose tributary area coincides with

that panel. Thus, the failure of a 4-foot by 8-foot panel could affect as much as 4 trusses when

spaced at 24 inches. As all trusses are checked for failure (at the wall connection), almost every

sheathing panel pressure would have been accounted for four times. The tedious process

motivated the introduction of a more efficient routine, perhaps curbing the lengthy process of

checking every relevant sheathing panel for every truss.

Failure of the roof-to-wall connections in the model could be categorized into two

mechanisms, uplift failure or toppling. Uplift is a function of the amount loading on sheathing

panels attached to the truss. Toppling is identified when a significant amount of sheathing panels

have been pulled from the truss, leaving it to stand free in the wind without lateral resistance.

The vulnerability curve of the truss failures was examined, and revealed there was a

modeling issue in the routine. At a certain velocity, usually past 150 mph, the failure of the

trusses did not increase with increasing velocity, but actually decreased. As sheathing panels

were dislodged from the roof frame, the amount of load transferred to the trusses decreased.










Figure 3-5 shows a vulnerability curve for the roof-to-wall connections obtained from the

original Model.

A more reasonable vulnerability curve would exhibit monotonic behavior as the windspeed

increased. The solution was therefore to modify the truss failure check process so that results

would appear more plausible. The truss vulnerability curve may even be expected to act increase

independently of roofcover and sheathing failure, because roof-to-wall connection failure can

occur before there is any roofcover loss.

An overhaul of the original truss failure check routine eliminated the need to check for the

uplift pressure on every sheathing panel. A truss layout for the typical residential home was

created and drawn in AutoCAD. Trusses were spaced at 24 inches, meeting the Florida Building

Code requirements. The three wind load cases were drawn up and laid over the new truss layout

to see how the truss tributary areas overlapped with the three different pressure zones. The

percent area of each truss under a zone was calculated using AutoCAD's polyline area property,

so that a weighted pressure coefficient was obtained for each truss on the roof. The process of

obtaining the weighted pressure coefficients followed closely with the process used to create the

new sheathing and roofcover pressure matrices. The subfunction r~wconn~uplift, whose

purpose is to obtain the uplift force in each truss in the form of array, contained a 3-column

matrix containing weights by area of the contribution of a pressure zone to a truss' s uplift. The

1st column of the array contains contributions of the interior pressure zone, the 2nd COlumn

contains information about the edge pressure zone, and the 3rd COlumn contains information

about the corner edge zone. The array is multiplied with a 3-row column vector containing the

random pressure coefficients simulated by MATLAB to represent the pressure coefficients per

zone. The matrix product of these two arrays becomes the weighted pressure coefficient for each










truss along a side of the house. The output of this subfunction includes two 2-column arrays

containing weighted pressure coefficients for the trusses along the front and back of the house,

and another for the side trusses, whether gable-end or hip trusses. Figure 3-6 shows the typical

truss layout for gable and hip roofs.

The new method was found to run significantly faster, utilizing efficient matrix operations

in MATLAB, and eliminated the need to check values in the sheathing pressure matrix multiple

times. It also corrected the errant trend of the vulnerability curve at high windspeed, where a

higher speed led to a lower number of damaged trusses. Figure 3-7 presents the vulnerability

curve obtained from the new algorithm, in comparison to curve from the original model, and the

roofcover and sheathing panel loss.

Model Calibration and Verification

Observed damage data after the 2004 hurricane season is an appropriate data source to

calibrate and validate the FHLM results from the physical damage model. The inspections

included houses affected by Hurricanes Charley, Frances, Ivan, and Jeanne. Building

components such as roofcover and windows were compared to FHLM results.

Homeowners in the vicinity of the hurricane path were stratified into regions based upon

maximum windspeed at that residence. The houses were separated in terms of old and new

construction practice, where the older homes were identified as those which were built prior to

the 2001 Florida Building Code. For each windspeed region, the shingle loss was classified into

six cases of shingle loss, as can be found in Table 3-1. Each case corresponds to percentage loss

range. The frequency of each case was obtained, and multiplied by its expected shingle loss

percentage, then summed down to obtain the expected shingle loss for that windspeed region.

The windspeeds were finally divided by the terrain roughness in the area. The results of these

calculations can be seen in Table 3-1.









Three windspeed regions provided three calibration points that could be plotted with the

vulnerability curve. A least-squares method was used to produce a theoretical best-fit curve to

the set of three points. The derivative of the vulnerability curve closely resembles a Gaussian

curve, and so the appropriate model curve to go by would be some version of the error function.

Thus, the function that was to be modeled takes the form: f (x) = 0.5 [erf (Ax B)+1i], where


the eror fniuncirfonisdfnd as: erf(x) = e d ..i The parametrsAn d B are s~nubeto


least squares optimization, to determine the best-fit curve.

Once the parameters A and B were obtained for a set of data points for old and new code,

the model curve with the corresponding model parameters were plotted with the data points and

results from the FHLM. The curve obtained from older homes was compared with vulnerability

curves for buildings simulated with weak mitigation. Similarly, the model curve for newer

homes was compared with building simulated with strong mitigation. Figure 3-8 presents a

visual comparison between the data points obtained from the damage surveys, the best-fit curve,

and the vulnerability curves obtained from simulation. In Figure 3-9, the reader can see that

comparison of the data points for old and new code sample homes, with the vulnerability curves

for strong and weak mitigation.

Interpretation of Figures: Figures 3-8 and 3-9 demonstrate the proximity of the results

from FHLM simulation of weak and strong mitigation to the expected loss determined from the

damage surveys. The weak model appears more conservative in estimate to the damage survey.

This is due to fact that the weak mitigation simulation represents construction using much older

methods, such as toenail connections in the trusses. The damage survey points representing the

old building code are in actuality homes built between the 1994 and 2001 building codes.










Buildings satisfying this criterion can be expected to perform significantly better than what the

FHLM predicts.

Damage survey points obtained for homes built after the implementation of the 2001

Florida Building Code share a stronger resemblance with strong mitigation results from the

Model. The strong mitigation results are based upon construction modeled by current

construction practices. The homes with the strong mitigation package, for example, are

constructed with Simpson Strong Tie roof-to-wall connections. As a result, the total loss for any

given windspeed is substantially less.

Model Consolidation

Originally, the model was created to handle different building characteristics individually.

Three regions (south, central, north), two roof types (gable, hip), and two construction materials

(wood or concrete block walls) translated into 12 separate model files that were created, and

would need to be run separately with different mitigation parameters. The original Cope Model

evolved from a single structural type to many structural types with many mitigation scenarios.

The most expedient way to expand the original model with additional structural types was a cut-

and-paste procedure, where the original model is saved under a different name, and

modifications are made. However, this ultimately produced many models that were difficult to

track when using the Model to simulate many possible mitigation options. The process of

running 12 different files for 12 combinations with the same mitigation setting could become

tedious and time-consuming, and would require supervision throughout simulation time. Much

user time was spent organizing and tracking the running of 12 separate models with many

combinations of mitigation. This was an impractical situation with a high degree of likelihood of

user error.









Another feature of the new model is that is has been consolidated, capable of handling all

regions and types, dimensions and mitigation parameters. To do this, the main processes were

identified that were common in all 12 damage model files. This included the random generation

of the pressure coefficients, the creation of the pressure matrices, initial failure check, internal

pressure check, and reiteration until no further failure is identified. Some priority variables

designate the general direction of the model model location, wall type, and roof type, and

mitigation. The mitigation was consolidated into a vector containing scalar values representing

different settings for the homes' storm preparation. Formerly, the mitigation vector was created

inside a switch statement. The new FHLM calls the mitigation vector at the function's calling.

Some values are read through a text file to allow for sensitivity analysis. These variables

were organized into different categories, and the sets of values are contained in individual text

files to be read by the main damage model function. These include the pressure coefficients (i.e.,

roof pressures, wall pressures), the COV for the pressure coefficients, internal pressure, and the

ASCE K-values for topography, directionality, height and importance. The variables were set up

in such a way that they may be edited without changing the actual damage model files, although

can only be changed between simulations.

The final step of the consolidation process was the separation of different processes in the

code depending on roof type and wall type. A home with a hip roof does not contain any gable-

end trusses, and likewise the gable roof home does not contain any side trusses. At the

appropriate location in the code, a switch statement diverts the flow of code for either a hip or

gable roof. A similar situation at a different location occurs when the wall type designates the

existence of stud-to-sill connections. A wood-frame building requires checks for these










components, but need not be checked for concrete masonry, since they are non-existent in

concrete masonry.

The consolidation of the different model files into one allows that a function can call these

damage models within a loop, and can run a list of simulations without the interaction of the

user. Further, the values of the input parameters can be determined in this higher-class function,

and be called down to the main function. The largest benefit of this function is that it removes

the need to edit the text inside the code prior to every simulation run.

Menu Creation

In addition to consolidating the 12 models into a single more flexible model, it became

necessary to simplify the means of establishing user input to control the specifics for a given

simulation run (i.e. what kind of model with what mitigations in place). The idea is that a single

simple set of commands can be issued to run several models in sequence. These models may

have some input parameters in common, and other that are unique to that model. A significant

portion of the modification made to the Cope Model allow for such sequential runs to be easily

declared by the user.

The physical damage model, which is capable of being called by the user in a MATLAB

environment, is written so that any editing of the script itself is unnecessary. The list of input

variables can be organized into scalars or vectors for easy transfer. In such an environment, it

would be very easy to develop another task that could load this file multiple times, with different

sets of information. A manual menu allows for the user to input the variables sequentially and

display it back. A file menu function reads the instructions from a text file, which contains a

sequence of key characters and numbers. The obj ective was to develop some routines which can

be instructed to call the main damage model files, and simulate many runs at once.










Table 3-2 lists the variables and type of all the input variables. Instructions may be given in

such a way that a variable can be defined once the first time, and be repeated for every run

thereafter. Each run is identified by a delimiter.

Manual Menu: The manual menu is a method of instruction where the Model receives

input from the keyboard. For example, suppose a user wants to run two models sequentially. The

first is a southern concrete block model that uses hurricane shutters, and the second is a wood

frame northern model that uses a different type of window protection. The menu requests

simulation details one variable at a time for the first model to be run, until all details have been

acquired. The menu repeats the details for the latest run back to the user, and then the process

can repeat or continue to the simulation step. The mitigation vector can be customized, or it can

be defined in terms of the standard weak, medium, or strong mitigation. If a custom mitigation

has been defined, then on the following step, the menu will remember the mitigation settings,

and will allow as a choice, to repeat the same mitigation vector created. After the list of

simulations is created, the list is displayed back to the user for Einal approval. Upon approval, the

simulation run begins.

File Menu: To speed automation a fie menu was created for a savvy user that wants to

avoid pressing all the necessary buttons to instruct the simulation details. The function inputs a

fie with a sequence of letters and numbers that the function is instructed to recognize as different

desired properties. The user designates the number of simulations on the first line, and

subsequent lines would contain information pertaining to one simulation detail. For example, the

fourth line represents the roof type. Depending on the number of runs desired, the information on

that line can be set to be "g h h h." This tells the program that the user wants the first model to

have a gable roof, and wants the second, third, and fourth simulation to have hip roofs. Of










course, it is necessary that the information in the first line be "4," representing four simulations.

If the roof type line is defined with one letter, "g" or "h," it gives instructions that all four

simulations are instructed to be with one roof type. These instructions are typical of the region

line, wall type line, roof type line, garage line and story line. An example of the input file' s

format can be seen in Figure 3-10.

The seventh and subsequent lines are unique in the manner the instructions need to be

written. The simulation number line must contain one number that will be consistent for all

simulations. The windspeed vector can contain the text "default," "d," or three numbers

representing the lowest windspeed, highest windspeed, and windspeed increment to create it. An

example is "50 250 20," which simulates all wind speeds from 50 to 250 mph, at increments of

20 mph. Thus, the vector would appear to be 50, 70, 90, and so on until 250 mph. The delimiter

line must contain alphanumeric strings, one for each simulation desired. The delimiter is an

information tag used to identify the MAT-file containing all the information about simulations

results. The final line, or lines, will contain information about the mitigation. Information for

mitigation can be written in one line to be repeated, or can be written, simulation at a time, in the

following lines. The information read can be "w," "m," or "s," depending on the mitigation

package desired. Another option would be to input a delimited string of 11 numbers which

designate the set of mitigation one setting at a time. Finally, if all information is inputted

correctly into the function, then the simulation information will be displayed and will ask the

user to affirm the instructions.

There are numerous benefits to running the simulations using the menu files. It eliminates

the need for tedious clerical work, in which the user needs only to press a few buttons, and the

rest of the work is done by the menu functions. It facilitates information management and










mitigation sensitivity. Because it can be instructed to run multiple simulations back to back, it

eliminates the supervision previously required on the hour. Thus the modified physical damage

component of the FHLM has been transitioned from its original state as a development tool and

into a form capable of simulation a multitude of mitigation measures at one instruction. The

Model is now more suited for generation of a high volume of output.

Conclusion

The updated and improved physical damage component of the Florida Hurricane Loss

Model has been created to facilitate the entire simulation process. The new damage model file is

capable of simulating all permutations of the input variables. Higher-class files have been created

which allow the user to instruct multiple simulations at once. This has largely facilitated the

management of simulations with different settings, allows the program to run for days on end

without running out of instructions.

The sensitivity analysis could continue to determine how the model responds to changes in

windows and openings strengths to match information obtained from the damage surveys. This

aspect of the damage model can be conducted in the same manner as was conducted for the

roofcover analysis. The increased breakage of windows will affect the internal pressure of the

house. It may be of interested as well to check the history of the internal pressure as damage

around the house is recognized.

Another direction the model can take is to incorporate irregular shaped homes into the

model. The original model was developed with rectangular-shaped homes.

Further development of the model can lead to improved information about component

strengths, particularly from windows, doors and garages. This may begin with some destructive

testing. Also, analysis of the pressure behavior measured on the instrumented roofs from the










FCMP program can be used to assess the precision of pressure coefficient values adapted from

ASCE 7 for use in this Model.

To improve the functionality of the Hurricane Loss Model, it may be advantageous to

create a graphical user interface in MATLAB to manage the simulations, replacing the menu

functions created. A GUI can assist the user in seeing all the simulation details simultaneously.

The interface can be a system of click-boxes and radio buttons, representing each simulation

detail, such a roof type. Much of the code for this GUI can be acquired from the original menu

Hiles.

Finally, a more significant overhaul of the FHLM could be undertaken to allow the

inclusion of wind speed duration and the accumulation of damage to the same model from

multiple wind speeds and directions. The current approach simply applies a single speed and

direction to a given model to tabulate total damage to that sample home. A more realistic

scenario would include damage as it accumulates from low winds speeds through the peak winds

from a given hurricane, including the directional changes. This will require the wind Hield

modeling team to work in concert with the physical damage modeling team. Currently these two

model components (wind and damage) are being developed separately. This was important to the

overall model development process to avoid the assumptions and shortcomings of one model

component to affect the development of the others. However, each component has now been

sufficiently developed that such interactions between model components can now be

investigated.


























Table 3-2. Input Variables to Consolidated Damage Model
# Variable Name Data Type Example Values
1 Number of simulation runs Integer 10
2 Region type Character'nc,'s
3 Wall type Character 'c', 'w'
4 Roof type Character 'g', 'h'
5 Garage Character 'y', 'n'
6 Number of stories Integer 1, 2
7 Number of simulations per model Integer 1000
8 Wind speed vector 3xl Integer, String 50 250 10, 'default'
9 Delimiters for simulations Nxl String 'deliml delim2 delim3'
10 Mitigation vector 11x1 Integer, Character'sm,'w


Table 3-1. Model Calibration Points
Old Code
Case (mph)
110-120 131
0% 9 8
0-2% 3 9
3-590 0 5
6-10% 0 5
11-25% 0 7
26-50% 0 7


New Code
110-120
8


0-140


140-150
2


130-140
6
4
0
2
0
0
12


140-150
9
2
8
1
1
1
22


Total


Expected Loss (%) 0.50


15.07


16.65 0.67


2.33


5.86












I


2. Lallulate PolnltL Pesus usnig Mmlue al Ant i-ril ttpus with i~ntera op ul -uth
3. CarnputeAggregate Presures on Building Conmonients (Roof Covr,Roof StreahingP~arel
Opnings, Wall Sections)
4. Calculate Additional Structural Loads (Roofto Wall Cormectiore()
5. CarnpareLOad to Capacity to Deennine afCompaoents Fail
6. Adjust Irteral Prussure Codlficiatto Refect Dmage
?. Recalculate Point Fressures, Aggegate Pressure, and Structural Lolads onDarnaged Strature
Compare Lod to Capacily to Detenninle AdditionalFailure
9. Tallyo~arragd~omponalls


Fr~rmiyData
From the Data Set ofN~ Similar Buildings Subjected to the Sime Intesity Storm
1. Calculate the Probabittie of Cambined Darage State Occurngg
2. Calculate flhe Conditional Probability of Damage Extent
Rcrults am one pomt in damage matrix and conditional probability marix- for gaval V.




Figure 3-1. Flow Chart of Florida Hurricane Loss Model.


Repeat noINwu urmane


For One Housie ofl aivenl Typr. S~Unlek:
1. Capacities for RoofCoveringPieces
2. Capacities for Roof Sheathi~Png arel
3. Capacities forRoof toWall C'onnectiton
4. Capacities or Wall Systems
5. Capacities for Openings
6. Orientation ofHouse (acing Directionfon ~ofron or


Roof Cover


Roofto Wall

Connections


Op enings


Figure 3-2. Diagram of Typical Residential Home & Components (Cope, 2004)


Define the Hurricane Event:
1. Maxirnun 3-Second Gust Wind Speed
2. Direction of Max. 3-See Gust 8


Roof Sheathing


Wall





JIND



T~rc~r."X"
~_ofoo_







4.1'


Figure 3-3. Typical Sheathing Panel Pattern. A) Gable Roof. B) Hip Roof.


i ?~~o`o`!
:, -I ii II ii i;


Figure 3-4. Wind Load Cases. A) Gable Roof B) Hip Roof.

















- .~


60







30 -

20

10


50 100 150 200 200
Velocity (mph)




SRoof Cover
90 -1 Sheathing
-R2W Connection

80

70




40




20



30


50101520 0

Velocity (mph)




Figure 3-5. Original Truss Vulnerability Curve. A) The Max and Min lines represent the
maximum and minimum truss failure simulated for a given windspeed. B) The Roof

Cover and Sheathing Panel is presented in comparison with Roof-to-Wall Connection
Failure .


SMin




































~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "."""---


Figure 3-6. Typical Truss Layouts. A) Gable Roof. B) Hip Roof.



100


90----OLD Roof Cover
--OLD Sheathing
NEW R2W .
80 NEW RoofCoe
-NEW Sheathing

70-


a 60-


50-





30-


20-


10-



50 100 150 200
Velocity (mph)




Figure 3-7. Comparison of Original and New Truss Vulnerability Curves.









































































Comparison of Vulnerability Curves to Damage Survey Points and Best-Fit Curve.
A) Weak Model to Old Building Code. B) Strong Model to New Building Code.


100 150 200
Velocity (mph)


05"




Figure 3-8.


100 150 200
Velocity (mph)





































































Figure 3-10. Example Input File for File Menu.


File Eclit Format Viewu Help


son





100

default
weak~s weakec weaken
WM


60
50 -






40

50






Figure 3-9.


150
Velocity (mph)


Comparison of Weak and Strong Models, Old and New Building Code Damage
Survey Data Points.









CHAPTER 4
DEVELOPMENT OF COMMERCIAL HURRICANE LOSS MODEL

Introduction

The State of Florida has contracted the consortium that developed the Florida Hurricane

Loss Model (FHLM) to extend the model from residential to commercial structures. The

construction methodology for residential housing differs greatly from that used for commercial

structures, and thus this expansion of the physical damage component of the FHLM is a

significant undertaking. This chapter addresses the beginnings of the process needed to assemble

the probabilistic physical damage model for commercial structures, and will serve as a roadmap

for the next student.

Other than residential buildings, what other types of buildings claim significant losses from

tropical storm damage? Examples of structures not included in the scope of the residential model

are condominiums, office buildings, warehouses, hospitals, schools, and many others. Most of

these buildings are multi-story, and can be located in a variety of different terrains. They can be

located near other multi-story buildings, or in open land where the nearest building is far away.

The maj ority of exposures are classified somewhere between these two extremes. In the case of

residential housing, it is a reasonable assumption that the vast maj ority of homes are located

within a suburban setting with similar structures surrounding it. Commercial structures can be

much more variable in their surroundings, from being the highest building for miles (e.g. three-

story condos in a mostly single family home suburban setting), to being a relatively small

building in the immediate vicinity (e.g. three-story condo near taller office buildings near a city).

Commercial structures also offer a greater variety of building styles and construction

materials relative to residential. For example, curtain walls may be glass, brick, or many other

options, each with a different set of vulnerabilities to be considered in high winds.









The effects of wind on commercial structures are quite different from one-story residential

buildings. Because they are much taller, the variation of wind in the vertical direction is much

larger. The wind flow around the building has high amounts of turbulence due to the larger

obstruction of the commercial building. Turbulence has the capability of lifting obj ects off the

ground. Obj ects which have become air-borne become proj ectiles and can potentially impact the

curtain wall. In the case where the curtain wall is made of glass, the building envelope can be

penetrated, and would invite water intrusion. Moreover, equipment on the roof is vulnerable to

impact breakage because of high wind flow and pressure.

Repairs associated with this amount of damage can be very significant. Any windows

impacted and breached will need to be replaced. Interior renovation is possible because of water

penetration. Office equipment, including computer hardware and furniture, may need to be

replaced. Also, if the structure is adorned with exterior insulation finish systems (EIFS), the

facade will need replacement. The mechanical equipment will also need to be inspected for

damage. Damage will necessitate repair or replacement.

Aside from component damage, interior or exterior, a damaged building is outside of its

functionality. Inhabiting residents are displaced from their dwellings. Potential patrons are

deterred from appealing tourist spots. An office building out of commission may be unfit to serve

as a place of work until repaired. This can result in a business being unable to perform normal

day-to-day operations, and lose potential business.

All of these considerations must be accounted for when proj ecting insured losses due to

hurricane winds on commercial structures. The UF team contributing to this multi-university

effort is again focusing on the modeling of the physical damage to the exterior of the building.

This chapter will address the work that has begun along those lines.









Effects of Wind on Multi-Story Buildings

Damage measured on a multi-story building is the combination different failure types. The

structural frame of the building is not likely to collapse from even very severe wind. However,

there are many components on the exterior of the building that can fail at modest wind speeds

and produce insurable losses. The building envelope, designed with more aesthetical priority, is

modularized. The loss of a unit glass wall cover should not contribute to the collapse of the

structure, but will permit water penetration, content loss, and loss of functionality.

Sources of damage were categorized to commence the development of a multi-rise

building model. They may be organized into three contributing sources:

* Debris impact;
* Water intrusion;
* Facade damage.

Debris Impact

The flow of wind provides an energy source that is dissipated into various mechanical

processes. It holds the capacity to transport obj ects of significant mass. For example, water may

be regarded as a particle. Wind certainly has the ability to drive the particle through the air.

Eventually, the water may collide against some surface, and will transfer energy-momentum to

that surface in the form of some concentrated pressure. Cladding materials such as glass and

EIFS will be subj ected to that concentrated pressure. The goal will be to analyze the energy-

momentum that an air-borne particle can transmit, and how much a cladding material can resist.

The concept is expandable to other obj ects such as cladding materials from nearby damaged

structures, gravel ballast on nearby roofs, vegetation, etc.

An obj ect becomes air-borne from the wind flow interacting around it as well as with the

surface supporting the obj ect. The wind energy around the obj ect is enough to overcome its

inertia. The transfer may be expressed in terms of its energy or momentum. For example, the










wind energy may expressed as: py2 V, in terms of the density of air, velocity, and the

volume of air. It is also possible to calculate the inertia of an obj ect. The wind energy and the

obj ect inertia in the volume displaced can be compared to identify if objects are capable of

becoming air-borne.

Realistic components of debris can be identified and analyzed to determine its inertia. The

common things that compose debris in general consist of roofing material (gravel, shingles),

temporary construction material, and cladding materials (e.g. broken glass).

An obj ect that is traveling through the air is available to strike against the surface of some

building cladding material. Window glass, brittle in behavior, can shatter upon impact. EIFS, or

synthetic stucco, can be impacted and expose the foam material underneath the base coat,

making it vulnerable to water, and long-term deterioration. Window strength must be considered

from a statistical point of view, and phenomenon of failure will be a consequence of its

comparison with debris impact statistics.

The terrain surrounding the structure being modeled is a critical component for

determination of vulnerability to windborne debris. A 10 story condo surrounded by 5-story

buildings with gravel ballast roofs will be subj ected to a heavy concentration of debris.

Water Intrusion

Water intrusion is a consequence of debris impact, performance of exterior windows and

doors, and the performance of the roof membrane. Debris impact can produce breaches in the

building envelope that permit wind driven rain to enter. The water membrane on the roof may be

torn from loading or debris and permit water to enter from the top down. Windows and sliding

glass doors that fail under cyclical wind pressure loading can also produce significant water

penetration. However, physical failure of components is not the only cause of water penetration.










Larger surface area windows and double sliding glass doors on condo balconies can flex under

high winds. This flexure may not cause the failure of the door or window, but the deformation

may provide a path for water penetration through the separation between frame and wall. This

has been observed in many hurricanes.

Water penetration can cause interior contents of the building to be damaged to the point of

repair or replacement, and lead to premature deterioration of metal fasteners in the building

framing and curtain wall systems.

The UF efforts on the commercial modeling addition to the FHLM will focus on the

physical damage to the exterior of the building and the failure of components. Other model

development teams will specifically the address the water penetration issue on interior losses.

Facade Damage

The building envelope provides aesthetic appeal and protects the interior from damage. It

may also provide assistance to the structural frame in resistance shear and moment. Typical

facade materials of multi-story buildings in Florida are stucco, glass, brick veneer, and exterior

insulation finish system (EIFS). Synthetic stucco is a material that is applied to concrete masonry

to provide additional thermal insulation to the building. Glass allows transmittance of light and

other aesthetic appeal. Brick veneer also provides aesthetic appeal and a second layer of

structural protection over the concrete masonry. EIFS provides thermal insulation, more so than

stucco, but is vulnerable to impact from debris or even vandalism.

Damage to a building facade can be caused from a variety of things. Wind suction on the

leeward side of a building can undo adhesives or mechanical fasteners binding the exterior wall

to aesthetic cladding, such as EIFS. This occurrence is accompanied with water penetration

which can compromise the performance of EIF S and brick veneer, if constructed with poor









craftsmanship. Debris impact, already discussed, can penetrate the facade to expose the interior,

if the striking obj ect transfers enough energy-momentum.

Fundamentals of Developing the Hurricane Loss Model

The commercial FHLM will be developed in similar manner as the residential Model was

constructed. The model program is a Monte Carlo simulation, randomly generating wind loads

and wind-borne projectiles, and randomly assigning component strengths. A check will identify

if a component has failed under the wind forces. The load side of the equation will be developed

from ASCE 7 for acquiring wind pressure, along with a suitable debris impact model,

encompassing many types of obj ects relevant to multi-story buildings. The resistance side of the

equation will be developed based upon statistical strengths of glass and EIFS. In a departure

from the modeling assumptions used for the residential model, the failure of doors and windows

will be expanded to include not only physical breakage, but also sufficient deformation to permit

water penetration.

Modeling Debris Impact

Much like the residential Hurricane Loss Model, impact damage is positively correlated

with windspeed. A higher windspeed will induce more movement of obj ects which potentially

can become missiles. As the obj ects increase in velocity, they gain more kinetic energy. The

probability of the missile impacting something vulnerable may be considered proportional to the

vulnerable area as a fraction of the entire envelope.

To develop a debris impact model, it would be necessary to consider the list of obj ects

which compose debris observed in the aftermath inspections of multi-story buildings. To

properly simulate debris affecting these structures, it would be proper to stratify different classes

of these objects, based upon distributions of certain properties. These properties ought to be

identified in terms of density and obj ect dimensions.









It would be necessary to identify the source of each class of obj ects. For example, gravel is

found on the roof top, but may also originate from the building landscaping scheme at the ground

floor. Garbage and temporary construction material may usually be found near the ground floor.

After the wind picks up the obj ect, it has the capability of traveling up or down, depending on the

obj ect' s initial position.

When air-borne, the obj ect inertial energy can be determined. Variables such as the obj ect

density, dimension, and relative speed affect its energy. The probability of breaching a window

or penetrating a building' s vulnerable facade will depend on the possible breaching area, and the

strength of the vulnerable facade.

The different classes of obj ects which will be considered by the model to have the

possibility of becoming air-borne and impacting can be broken down into four distinct groups.

Gravel from the roof of a building and adj acent buildings can compromise the life of its

cladding. Timber material is also capable of penetrating windows. Plywood material is a flat

obj ect which has an ease of creating lift when wind is passed underneath it. Shingles made of

ceramic or asphalt composes the fourth category of debris that can collect in the air and wreak

havoc on multi-story buildings.

Gravel Ballast: Gravel is the only category of these four that is considered round. These

small rocks composed mainly of limestone have been modeled in the past with a mean diameter

of 12 mm (HAZUS, 2000). This was measured in inspection of the Marriot-Datran Complex in

Miami, Florida following Hurricane Andrew. The unit weight of this limestone gravel can be

assumed to be 122 pcf (19.2 kN/m3) (Suiker et. al, 2005). The gravel ballast is also assumed to

be uniformly graded, which implies the COV for gravel density is fairly low. Because of









uniformity, the distribution of gravel diameters would be appropriately modeled as a uniform

di stributi on.

Timber Members: The second category of debris to be modeled is timber material

composed from temporary construction material. In the state of Florida, the most common wood

used is Southern Pine, which has a dry specific weight of 0.55 equivalent to 34.32 pcf. The

variation in weight of timber can be assumed to be between 0 and 20% moisture content, and this

is plausible due to rain and increased humidity during a storm. At the highest water content, the

unit weight increases to 41.18 pcf. If the probability of a random timber obj ect having density

between 34.32 pcf (dry weight) and 41.18 pcf (20% moisture) is assumed to include 95% of all

possibilities (4 standard deviations, assuming a Gaussian distribution), the mean unit weight

could be assumed to be 37.55 pcf, with a COV of about 5% ( = 1.715/37.55) (NDS, 2005).

Dimensions for a timber member consist of one long dimension, and two relatively short

dimensions. The two shorter determine the size of the timber. For example, a 2x4 member

typically has actual dimensions of 1'/ inches by 31/ inches (NDS, 2005). As the member flows in

the wind, the direction of flow will probably be parallel to its longitudinal axis. The smaller

dimensions will be in the plane normal to the velocity, and because of its geometry will catalyze

air viscosity. The characteristic length of all timber members can be modeled as a normal

distribution, taking the average of the shorter lengths. The COV of this length should be fairly

large to consider a variety of cut sizes. This would provide a realistic distribution of all timber

members in its possibility of comprising the debris cloud, because the characteristic length is

related to the radius of impact, to be considered later on.

Plywood Members: A third category of potential missiles are sheets of plywood, large

and small, that become air-borne from the effects of hurricane winds giving it lift off the ground.









The material density can be modeled to the same distribution for timber i.e., mean unit weight

of 37.55 pcf + 5%. Typical dimensions can be anywhere from 4 feet by 8 feet for one complete

sheathing panel, down to a piece small enough to create uplift at 50 mph. Juxtaposing the timber

material, plywood will have two long dimensions and one short one. The characteristic length,

related to the inertial energy of the obj ect, could be modeled to take the average of the longer

dimensions.

Roof Cover: The fourth category comprising the classes of debris is shingles. This

category may be opened up to two types of shingles, asphalt and clay. They are made up of

different materials, and also have distinct geometries. Asphalt shingles have been modeled in the

current FHLM (Cope, 2004), but may require some modification.

Now with a survey of different obj ects that can be flying through the air, capable of

creating damage on the modeled structure, it is possible to establish some criteria to determine

flight. This flight occurs when the velocity energy surrounding the obj ect is able to counteract its

inertia. The criterion is dependant on the modeled wind speed, air density, obj ect density and

characteristic length.

Determining Uplift: The density of air varies with relative humidity, but the dry weight of

air at standard temperate will be approximately 11.7 kN/m3. This quantity may want to be

modeled as a normal distribution. An increase in relative humidity will increase the air density,

which would improve the obj ect buoyancy. This could improve the chances of liftoff. The


criterion inequation form can be expressed as: U > 2 a R (Lee & Willis,


2002). The object density and air density, p;; and pa, respectively, are compared in ratio. The

constants l and CF are related to the obj ect' s ability to resist the flow of air. l is considered the

ratio of force required to overcome the object weight. This variable takes the value greater than









or equal to unity. It could be modeled as some lognormal distribution with unity as some value

less than the mean. The aerodynamic force coefficient, CF, iS related to the curvature of the face

of the obj ect in the direction of flow.

Determining Damage Energy: If an obj ect satisfies the above condition, then the

probability of the obj ect striking the model building' s cladding would be non-zero. The damage

equation would depend on the obj ect and air density, weight ratio and aerodynamic coefficient as

before, and introduce a ratio of the obj ect to wind speed J. The damage energy of an obj ect can


be designated as: D = -1+ pni FCp)~, 81 a ni 3 28 (Lee & Willis, 2002). This quantity will


be expressed in units of energy. This way, it can be compared to impact energy of cladding

material.

An alternative approach to estimating damage from air-borne objects was also provided by

Lee and Willis (2002). A linear relationship is obtained in terms of the windspeed and the

characteristic length and ratio of obj ect density to air density. This relation applies well to sheets


and cubes: U/ oc 2 i g ( A reference point can be used to establish the


proportionality constant. Knowing an obj ect' s length and characteristic length, the necessary

windspeed for liftoff can be calculated as a check.

Modeling Vulnerable Cladding

The impact resistance of cladding materials must be considered to successfully model

damage from debris impact. It has been discussed that the main types of cladding that will be

modeled will be EIFS and glass. Synthetic stucco is a composite material of organic plastics and

cement. Together, they provide thermal insulation when applied to the exterior of a building, as









well as aesthetic appeal. Glass is a brittle material allowing transmittance of light, and is perhaps

the most common noticed component of any multi-story building.

Exterior Insulation Finish Systems. Synthetic stucco is known to have frequent failure in

every day function (Lampo & Trovillion, 1996), and is amplified with the event of a hurricane.

Main causes of failure include poor workmanship, thin base coat application, low resistance to

suction pressure, and water intrusion. Impact damage increases synthetic stucco's probability of

failure. Cracks peel off from the puncture hole created by impact. Water may enter through the

opening, and will be absorbed by the foam material beneath. Eventually, the humidity inside the

foam will affect the adhesive material bonding the substrate wall to the synthetic stucco finish,

and will cause delamination. This will necessitate replacement of the exterior finishing material.

Figure 4-1 below shows a damaged EIFS system on a hotel after the 2004 hurricanes in Florida.

Significant damage from water penetration occurred to the building after the EIFS system failure.

Investigation of synthetic stucco's strength from impact was thoroughly conducted. Two

engineers wrote three papers regarding EIFS properties and strength (Lampo & Trovillion,

1996). One surveying its impact resistance included three tests: the Falling Weight, Falling Ball,

and the Perfotest. The Falling Weight test involved a ball tied to a string to be dropped onto a

sheet of EIFS. The Falling Ball test dropped a ball vertically over a sheet of EIFS. The Perfotest

involved a rod proj ectile connected to a machine from a certain height above the stucco.

Of the procedures investigated, one is of most interest the Falling Ball Test. Two modes

of the test used two balls, one heavier than the other, to punch through the EIFS. The lighter ball

of 2 pounds and 2-3/8 inches in diameter was dropped from a height of 30 feet. A second ball of

4 pounds and 3 inches was dropped from 15 feet. The ball's energy-momentum was calculated.










The investigations tested two standard types of synthetic stucco, namely type PB and PM

(defined below). EIFS is constructed with a plastic in foam form covering the substrate wall,

providing excellent thermal insulation. Within the foam is a reinforcement mesh of one or two

layers, to absorb shock from impact. There are predominant types of reinforcement standard

mesh and impact-resistant mesh. The side of the foam touching the wall is covered with an

adhesive for application. The foam assembly is covered with a cementitious base coat, with hints

of polymer as well. The base coat protects the vulnerable foam underneath. PB, standing for

"polymer-based," is usually constructed with the inside foam made of molded expanded

polysterene (MEPS). PM, standing for "polymer-modified,"' contains extruded expanded

polysterene (XEPS), or polyisocyanurate (PIR).

One property that has best correlation with impact resistance is the base coat thickness. A

thicker base coat increases the impact resistance of EIFS. PM is much stronger than PB, but

because of economy, PB is much more common in the market. In general, increasing the number

of layers and improving their quality increases the strength of the finish system. However, results

of the exam indicate that the type and amount of reinforcement in the synthetic stucco finish does

not necessarily improve the material's impact resistance (Lampo & Trovillion, 1995). A few

instances occurred where finishes with less reinforcement performed better than samples with

more reinforcement.

Presentation of the results in the report by Lampo and Trovillion give excellent leads into

modeling EIFS. Trends of mean failure energy (MFE) versus base coat thickness were plotted.

There exists a significant positive correlation, and the failure of the synthetic stucco is measured

in units of energy. The linear trend was combined for PB and PM systems. The relation between

M~FE (in Joules) and thickness t (in millimeters) is: M~FE = -0.642 + 1.847t The correlation









coefficient for this relation is R2 = 0.770, which is moderately high. The correlation justifies

using a high COV in relating strength to thickness of EIFS.

Glass. Glass is perhaps the most noticed cladding material of most structures. It provides

an aesthetically pleasing decoration to the exterior to the building, and essential for satisfactory

light transmittance and energy savings. It is a crucial component of an architect' s design.

Engineers must design glass cladding to transfer stresses to the frame.

Because glass is a brittle material and can shatter upon impact, the Florida Building Code

sets requirements for impact-resistance windows. Particularly, the South Florida Building Code

obligates windows in the lower 60 feet of a building to be designed for impact resistance. This is

due to the higher expected 50-year windspeed in the region (ASCE, 2002). Recent observed

failures of glass cladding from impact higher than 60 feet after hurricane Wilma in 2005 is now

driving the Florida Building Commission to reconsider the 60 feet height limit on impact

protective glass systems.

Glass used as cladding on multi-rise structures can be constructed in several ways.

Monolithic glass can be attached to multiple stories. Glass can be attached to one story at a time.

Engineers must design for appropriately-sized expansion joints, more crucial for monolithic

glass. Treatment of glass for increased resistance includes annealed, heat-strengthened, and

tempered glass. Impact resistant glass, also referred to as sacrificial ply, contains two layers of

soda-lime glass plies, and one layer of polyvinyl butyral (PVB) (Saxe et. al, 2002). The PVB

layer acts as resistance to the breach of the window, in that it holds the two plies together in the

event of impact. Normally, an impacted window will shatter, but with the help of the PVB there

is decreased likelihood of this happening. This can prevent breach and water intrusion to the









building's interior. Despite savings of interior furniture and equipment, the window would need

to be replaced after the storm.

Failure of glass in the event of a hurricane could be attributed to the combination of out-of-

plane forces, such as pushing or pulling pressure, and impact breakage from debris. Load-

deflection relationships are available for windows (Minor & Norville, 2006). These may be

superposed with a concentrated pressure from impact to obtain the deflection of a window.

The HAZUS Manual (2000) presented some ranges of momentum breakage of windows

used in their modeling of some case studies. Momentum breakage values of a variety of window

types can be anywhere between 0.01 to 0.08 kg-m/s, units of momentum. The energy breakage

derived can be compared to the damage function for debris obj ects (Lee & Willis, 2002).

The impact resistance of sacrificial ply windows was investigated by Saxe and others

(2002). The test involved impacting the surface of the glass with steel balls of various sizes and

weights. The balls were impacted at various velocities, until a mean minimum breakage velocity

(MMBV) was obtained. Knowing the obj ect' s mass and velocity allows for both an energy and

momentum approach to window breakage. The paper also provided vulnerability curves for

probability of failure versus MMBV. It was concluded that increasing the steel ball size brings

down the MMBV. Attempts to fit the MMBV to probability distributions were unsuccessful. The

paper stated that the Weibull distribution was conservative compared to the normal and

lognormal distributions.

Modeling Methodology

The information described above was noted because of its potential to help create a Monte

Carlo simulation that could estimate damage on multi-story buildings. The process, similar to the

residential model, will involve random simulation of the load, and random simulation of the

resistance, where the randomness is described by an appropriate statistical model. The









identification of damage or failure involves comparison of the load and resistance. If the load

exceeds the resistance, then that constitutes failure of the component.

A flow chart of the debris impact model for the commercial FHLM can be encountered in

Figure 4-2. The debris model should somewhat resemble the residential model. It would be

necessary to establish the number of obj ects, which initially stationary, can potentially become

air-borne and compose the debris cloud. An energy approach to flight and failure will be

composed. This would also require the strength of the cladding materials to be associated with

maximum absorbed impact energy. The damage energy will be compared to the resistance

energy and damage if any will be identified. The damage of windows may be expressed in terms

of breach of windows. If one window is impacted twice, only one window will need to be

replaced. The summation of damaged EIFS may be calculated in percent of envelope area.

The program must assume a certain amount of each type of debris available for impact. For

example, if the class of debris considered is gravel, then an appropriate amount would depend on

the roof s square footage covered with gravel ballast, and how deep the layer of ballast is on the

roof. The amount of timber material will depend on the presence of some formwork, tents, or

garbage somewhere in the vicinity. Timber material will usually be encountered at ground floor.

Once this number is determined for the class of debris, then a density and characteristic length

vector should be created, representing one row for every obj ect that will be considered in the

debris impact model.

For each obj ect to be considered, for every class of debris, the process would continue with

the random simulation of characteristic lengths and obj ect densities. The aerodynamic force

coefficient may be determined once for each class of obj ect. This will vary from class to class,

but probably not from obj ect to obj ect in the same class. For example, the gravel ballast can be









modeled as spherical particles, and so the aerodynamic coefficient will be unique compared to

timber members and plywood. These two classes have predominantly flat faces, normal to the

wind in flight, and so will assume a different aerodynamic coefficient CF. The ratio of force

required for lift to inertial energy is a value that must be greater than unity, and can be assumed

to be less than some upper limit, say 1.4. These values may serve as the 2 standard deviations

below and above the mean value (95%), and be calculated back to obtain the mean and COV for

this variable.

The variables considered so far are the obj ect' s density and characteristic length, the force

ratio, and aerodynamic coefficient. Of these, the first three should be randomly simulated

vectors, one for each obj ect to be considered for lift. The fourth should be determined as a

constant depending on the class of debris being considered. To check for lift, the relation by Lee

and Willis should be considered (2002).

The final ingredients to input into the relation are the windspeed and air density.

Windspeed can be modeled in similar fashion as in the residential vector. A specific 3-second

gust wind speed value at 10 meter elevation is assigned, and the resultant load over the surface of

the structure determined using ASCE 7 pressure coefficients with some randomization added.

The increase of wind speed with height will also be accounted for.

With all of the ingredients generated, the equation above can be implemented into the

model. A factor equal to the right-hand side of the relation can be determined for every obj ect

considered, and be compared to the square of the velocity on the left-hand side. The identifier for

lift can be obtained in this manner, and obj ects not containing lift will be disregarded for the

remainder of the model.










Next, the probability that an air-borne obj ect will impact the building envelop must be

considered. The definition of this number calls for further development and search for statistics.

This value can trim down the list of obj ects that are flying through the air down to objects that

will be assumed to strike building exterior. The damage energy of each obj ect assumed to strike

the building will be calculated.

It has been mentioned that the largest factor related to impact resistance of EIFS systems is

the base coat thickness. Relations between base coat thickness and mean failure energy have

been discussed for exterior insulation finish systems (EIFS). However, a suitable distribution for

EIFS base coat thickness needs to be created. Typically, polymer-modified stucco is stronger

than the polymer-based version, although PB is found to be much more common in practice. The

threshold of thickness for synthetic stucco' s coat thickness between PB and PM systems is about

1/"(, which is equivalent to 6.35 mm. Base coat thickness of PB stucco is below this threshold. It

might be logical to implement two mean values for the base coat thickness of EIFS, one for PB

and another for PM. The COV can be the same for both, but it may be recommended to see a

high value to incorporate the inconsistencies in workmanship. The mean failure energy of the

finish can be derived from the thickness. Finally, when there is impact, it can be assumed that

there will be an area of impact centered at the contact between debris and Einish. A radius of

impact could provide a way to calculated the damaged area, and express it as a percentage of the

total EIFS area that will need to be replaced.

Another avenue of EIFS damage that could be considered is from suction pull-off. The

delamination of stucco from the substrate wall is something that is not so easy to identify as is

debris impact, but is consequential of water intrusion into the MEPS foam beneath the

cementitious base coat (Cheple & Huelman, 2000). There are numerous modeling challenges in









identifying and quantifying delamination. The phenomenon of delamination is cause by water

penetration beneath the base coat, and is a gradual process that eventually undoes the

effectiveness of the adhesive binding the finish to the substrate wall, typically concrete masonry

for our studies. The amount of water penetration necessary to cause delamination will need to be

investigated, as well as the typical area of delamination as a function of water penetration will

need to determined. The effects of negative wind pressure on a vulnerable delaminated wall

portion will also need to be determined.

In order to model glass, an energy approach to the impact breakage must be devised.

Currently, sources have been found which express the strength in terms of momentum. One

paper provides results universal to the energy or momentum approach (Saxe et. al, 2002).

However, more investigation is necessary for other types of glass found in multi-story buildings.

It is possible to model two types of glass, impact-resistant or sacrifieial ply, and non-impact

resistant glass, such as annealed, tempered, or heat-strengthened glass.

Conclusion

This chapter presents a starting point for development of a probabilistic physical damage

model of commercial structures. The maj or components under consideration will be debris

impact resistance, cladding system failure modes, water penetration through failed roof

membrane or failed or deformed windows and doors, and damage to the facade itself.

A proposed debris impact model has been presented. The impact resistance of exterior

insulating Einish systems and glass has been investigated. Other aspects of the model which

require further investigation include building geometry statistics, distribution of occupancy types

from city to city, information about building material statistics, statistics on building heights and

stories, and an investigation of surface roughness and the variation of them throughout an urban

area and boundaries. Once the building and neighborhood layout has been simulated randomly, it









would be possible to determine the amount of available debris as well as the likelihood of debris

impact on the model building.

Similar to the study conducted for the residential model, a study of the land area and its

constituents is necessary to compose a successful model of estimating damage on multi-story

buildings. This time, a study will need to be done for urban areas, where mid- and high-rise

buildings are common and in highest concentration. A study to identify properties of these

buildings will reveal statistical parameters that can be used for a Monte Carlo simulation. For

example, the relative use of EIFS, glass, and brick cladding systems on condominiums. Variables

that could be modeled statistically, given there is sufficient information available, are building

heights and stories, building areas, and terrain. There many cities in the Southeast United States

that have numerous high-rise structures in a condensed urban area, and may also have some

development authority involving the construction and maintenance of these structures: Miami,

Ft. Lauderdale, Palm Beach, Atlanta, Charlotte, Houston, New Orleans, Mobile are some

examples.

Information can be derived city by city, for a couple cities, and then spot-check the rest to

see if there is a startling discrepancy in statistics. Information that could be useful for the

commercial FHLM in an urban study can start with obtaining information about the distribution

of different building occupancy types, i.e., business, institutional, and residential. The

International Building Code (IBC) defines building in terms of their function to the public. Most

relevant to a study of high-rise buildings include office buildings, hospitals, condominiums, and

hotels. The IBC (and FBC) also provides limits to building heights and building area per floor

depending on the fire resistance of particular structural elements. Thus, reviewing information









available about the fire safety of a building or buildings in a locality can provide a detour to

obtaining building area and height statistics.

A second motivation for a building study in urban areas is to obtain some information

about the material used for curtain wall, history of EIFS installation or maintenance, etc.

Materials of a building' s curtain wall construction can be glass, concrete masonry, brick veneer,

stucco, EIFS, or even timber frame. Characteristics of glass, impact-resistant or not, throughout

the building, what size of glass sheets were installed is also of interest. Locations of EIFS and

stucco, relative to floor and wall, are also of interest.

Another aspect of building construction that can be included is building floor layout and

cross-section shape. The simplest cases are round and rectangular, but architects strive for more

abstract shapes and layouts every day, to accommodate for the public's increasing demand for

aesthetics. The dimensions of these layouts can be obtained from average area per floor.

Once this information is obtained, a building can be created from an entourage of randomly

simulated variables, which can be stratified in the methods described. Properties of the building,

such as height in stories, area per floor, and shape (circular or rectangular) can be determined by

random simulation. The terrain roughness in the area can be simulated to reduce the simulated

windspeed. The building can be created in the middle of 8 adjacent buildings, also of variable

height, area, and shape. The simulation of these buildings may assist in determining the amount

of debris present. For example, adj acent buildings' gravel ballast at the roof level will make the

model building's curtain wall vulnerable.

Once the model building and adj acent high-rises have been simulated, the amount of debris

can be modeled as a function of the buildings simulated. Case studies have shown that window

breakage from gravel ballast occurred near the initial position of the debris (i.e., from building










roof) (HAZUS, 2000). Other debris starting at the ground floor can be modeled to possibly affect

a certain number of stories above ground.

The window configuration on buildings can take two forms monolithic construction or

single-story assembly. In these differing types of construction, the windows can be installed as to

span one story at a time, or multiple stories. The impact of the different methods involves the

window area subj ect to breakage. If a multi-story spanning window is broken, that is more

damage as a percentage than if a single-story window is broken. There is also a possibility that a

window can be impacted more than once. It would be necessary to identify a particle of debris

that has impacted to a window that is subj ect to being impacted. Multiple impacts must be

considered, especially if one succeeds in breaking the window and another doesn't. The amount

of windows is a function of the building' s stories and area. Once a suitable number for windows

is determined, their strengths and damage indicators can be vectorized. Some building codes

require that impact-resistant windows be installed from the ground floor up to a minimum

distance. They may or may not be a desire to identify the floor and wall where the window is

located.

Further investigation needs to produce a statistical model for the impact resistance of

windows. It would be ideal to obtain some relation about the strength of glass from impact. It

would be advantageous to create this model from an energy point of view, consistent with

information about the strength of EIFS and impact from missiles.

Another area that was addressed earlier but not discussed is the amount of mechanical

equipment damage that may or may not be included in the model. Questions to answer are what

are typical configurations or mechanical equipment, what are identifiable limit states of the

equipment, and can the mechanical equipment itself become debris and impact nearby windows.









The last aspect of the commercial that needs further development is the estimation of wind

on the building. ASCE 7 contains design recommendations for a building of all heights. The

wind pressure increases with height, and the code provides factors to multiple the pressure at

gradient height with depending on the height considered. These factors are believed to obey

some power or logarithmic rule (Simiu, 1996). It may be advantageous to implement these rules,

because the pressure coefficients will get very conservative after 200 feet in height. At this point,

the coefficients are increased in 50-ft increments. A good approach to modeling wind in the

vertical direction would be to simulate constant lateral pressures per floor.


































Figure 4-1. EIFS-clad Building Damaged by Frances and Jeanne, Satellite Beach, Florida.















U- 511Ulel16
we vloo .C


For objects satisfying uplift,
calculate damage energy:

D-1 Crp, U


For objects satisfying up'lift determine
if there is impact. If there is impact,
then determine location of impact.
Check if the location is glass or: ElFS.


Figure 4-3. Flow Chart for Commercial Hurricane Loss Model Debris Impact Model.









CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION

Hurricane Damage Mitigation

This thesis presents contributions to several ongoing efforts to mitigate hurricane wind

damage to the man-made infrastructure.

Chase software

The collection of in-field extreme wind data will be enhanced through the development of

an interactive tool (Chase) that provides a means to visualize alternative equipment deployment

scenarios. The program was designed so that nearly anyone can produce a KML Hile interpretable

by Google Earth (GE) software. This will aid significantly in the decision making process in a

high-stress environment with a short window of opportunity. The tool allows the user to adapt

and develop new strategies based on the most recent information on storm path, intensity and

size.

Improvements can be made to the original program to further facilitate the work of the

Florida Coastal Monitoring Program. Determining an estimated time of landfall would give the

tower deployment team a timetable for deploying all towers before the hurricane's precession

reaches land. Information about timestamp of coordinates and translation velocity would

facilitate this. Chase should also be able to customize the order of the towers in deployment as

seen in Google Earth, as well as provide hyperlink information in the objects' tag box (in GE)

leading to the 15-minute summary files posted online. A land use land cover database that

contains ground roughness data in GIS format should be interfaced with Chase to allow users to

Eine-tune tower placement based on surrounding terrain. In this manner a deployment team could

conceivably have precise GPS coordinates for instrument deployment location before even

getting to the area.










Computational Model of Structural Vulnerability to Hurricane Winds

The residential physical damage prediction component to the Florida Public Hurricane

Loss Projection Model was overhauled to create a product that could be used by research

assistants in other schools to estimate damages to residential homes. The simulation engine was

based on the Monte Carlo methodology, which simulates a residence with random wind loads

and component resistances, identifies and records failure from roof to foundation, and compiles

the information for statistical analysis.

A correction to the routine calculating roof-to-wall connection failure was introduced and

verified. It replaced the original uplift calculation process, which estimates a decrease in damage

at high velocities due to excessive sheathing panel loss from uplift. The vulnerability curve

produced from the revamped routine exhibited monotonic behavior as desired. A universal

damage model file was created that would encompass all simulation variables, including region,

roof type, and wall construction material. Finally, a duo of menu functions were designed that

could call simulation runs in succession, and eliminate user supervision of the simulation

process.

Data points from a damage survey of the 2004 hurricane season were plotted with the

Model results of weak and strong mitigation. The strong mitigation simulation results

corresponded well to the expected loss for newly-constructed homes. Weak mitigation results

were somewhat conservative in comparison to data points from older constructed homes (1994 to

2001 building codes). This is satisfactory because the model's weak mitigation model is meant to

emulate a residence of more age, implying weaker performance of the roof components.

The development of a commercial Hurricane Loss Proj section Model was initiated with a

literature review and methodology formulation. Research produced the characteristics of debris

impact, including liftoff and impact energy estimations. Debris was classified into four groups,









and relevant properties of each group were discussed. The information provided is a formulation

of statistical values to be used. Component strength of EIFS was also discussed, providing a

relation between base coat thickness and mean failure energy. Glass, types of construction,

material variations, and impact energy breakage were discussed.

Completing the initial version of the commercial model requires further investigation.

Building construction statistics for the Southeastern United States would need to be obtained,

such as building height distribution, building area per floor, and floor layout geometry. The

statistics could be obtained from development authorities in various cities in the Southeast. The

obj ective of conducting these building studies is to obtain some statistical parameters that can be

linked to normal-distribution simulation of these properties. Modeling an urban neighborhood

effectively will the pave the way to creating a successful debris impact model.









APPENDIX
CHASE TUTORIAL

This appendix serves to instruct the reader how to use the Chase software to design a

deployment layout. It will provide some examples to serve as a walk-through of the program.

Example 1

This example will walk the reader through the procedure to creating the storm path

spreadsheet, loading the program, and creating the KML file for use in GE.

Storm Path Spreadsheet File

The process begins when the program calls the file in a format using the storm's name and

season. The file name is made by concatenating the hurricane name and hurricane season,

without delimiter. For example, Hurricane Jeanne from the 2004 season should be named

"Jeanne2004. xls".

Open the spreadsheet file. The spreadsheet is made from scratch, using information

available on the NOAA website. Storm center latitude and longitude are posted every six hours

on the website. Storm path latitude information should be written into the third column, and

longitude information should be written in the fourth column. It is important that the number of

latitude and longitude are equal. Information in the other columns will be ignored. See Figure Al

for a screenshot of the contents of a typical spreadsheet ready for utilization.

Initiating Chase Program

Once the spreadsheet program has been created, start the Chase program by clicking on the

file "Chase.exe." An additional folder containing system files will be created in the root

directory. The Chase GUI window will load up for input. Refer to Figure A2 for a screenshot of

the contents of the Chase root directory after decompression. Also, Figure A3 displays the main

Chase GUI window.









Loading Hurricane Track

Now that the Chase GUI has been loaded, the program is ready to input the hurricane name

and season to load the track. Also, be sure to load the state where you expect the storm to make

landfall. Once you have chosen the correct information, click on the "Load Track" button.

A window should be displayed with the states' contours and the loaded storm path. Notice

the x-axis displays the longitude values, and y-axis displays the latitude values, in degrees. Also,

notice that a value pops up in the Landfall Heading box, which is the storm's direction when the

eyewall center intersects the coastline. The text window on the bottom left corner should say

"Track loaded successfully." See Figure A4 for this step of the process.

Loading Deployment Layout

The next step is to input how many towers you want to deploy. Suppose our test

deployment will include five towers in the Cannonball Run layout. Suppose also you want the

towers spaced at 1-mile intervals. Assume that the storm's radius to maximum winds is 10 miles,

and the inland distance we want to deploy is 8 miles. By default, the Cannonball Run is selected

at Chase initialization, so you will not need to change that setting. You may use the increment

and decrement buttons, or manually input the values. Once Chase is displaying the information

you want, click on the "Load Layout" button, and wait for the layout window to display.

You should see the storm's radius to maximum winds path in red, and the storm cluster

centered on the offset path. The cluster center will be indicated by a blue circle, and the towers

will be indicated by green stars. All the deployment's information is repeated in a yellow text

box at the top right corner of the figure.

In the Chase GUI window, the tangent heading will indicate the direction that the storm is

heading when the storm passes through the tower cluster center. Additionally, a list of the

towers' locations will be seen in the Tower Locations box, in terms of latitude and longitude.









The text window should now say "Layout loaded successfully." This step can be visualized in

the Figure A5.

Creating KML File

If the deployment is consistent with the information you wanted, the next step is to click on

the "Write KML" button. You will know the file was written correctly when the text window

says "KML file written successfully." Double-check that the file was created by looking the

Chase root directory. There, you should find a file that is called "FCMP-Hurricane Jeanne-2004-

Cannonball Run." Figure A6 displays the Chase GUI window with the satisfactory message.

Figure A7 presents the Chase root directory after the KML file has been created.

Loading KML File

Now that the deployment layout has been created, and the KML file written with the

deployment details, open up Google Earth. Once loaded, you may locate the KML file just

created, then click and hold on the file. With the first mouse button pressed, drag the mouse over

into the GE interface, and under the mouse pointer you will see a small gray box appear. Let go

of the mouse button, and GE will be instructed to load the KML file just created. When loaded,

the camera will zoom out, or in, so that the storm path and max winds path will be maximized in

the window. See Figure A8 for the typical view after the Chase KML has been loaded.

The folder structure can be seen in the sidebar to the left. A checkbox should be marked to

the left of the folder icon, next to a box with a plus sign. Click on this plus sign to see the

contents of this folder. There should be three subfolders: Cannonball Run, Storm Track, and

Radius to Maximum Winds. Each can be individually turned off if you wish.

To zoom in closer to where the towers have been deployed, expand the Cannonball Run

subfolder. In there you will find a series of tower placemarks and subfolders. The subfolders

called "Tower" contain the polygon information used to represent the instrumentation towers.









Click on any one of the tower placemarks, and GE will zoom in to its location. Allow the

imagery to update and load completely. You should also see a window appear that contains the

name of the placemark and its GPS coordinates. Refer to Figure A9 for a screenshot of GE

displaying this information.

Feel free to zoom in closer on any of the towers to observe the land around its proposed

deployment position. Be aware of its possible surroundings: residential communities, vegetation,

parks, bodies of water, airports, highways, schools, or warehouses. The key to determining an

effective layout lies in choosing the inland distance and cluster spacing such that every tower is

likely to be placed somewhere within open terrain. Bear in mind that the scale of the tower in GE

is grossly exaggerated, but may deceive the user as to the size of the open area in the vicinity of

the tower. Refer to Figure A10 to view a close-up of the tower and the vicinity it lies in.

Example 2

The second example will involve integrating a Blue Tarp deployment with a Red Rover

deployment. We will load the track for Hurricane Jeanne, and coordinate a tower position for

each of two residential homes retrofitted for our pressure sensor instrumentation. The remaining

towers will be deployed perpendicular to the storm path.

The Chase program is not designed to create mixed deployments. However, we will

accomplish this by creating two KML files, one for the Blue Tarp portion of the deployment, and

Red Rover for the second portion.

Loading Hurricane Jeanne Track

Locate the 2004 Jeanne hurricane track in the Chase directory. Make sure that Florida is

selected as the state chosen for deployment. Click on the "Load Track" button to verify that the

track has been loaded successfully.










Blue Tarp Deployment

Suppose that the deployment for this storm will involve some nearby retrofitted homes.

Particularly, the Smith home and Jones home are very close to the proj ected path of the storm.

Suppose that FCMP decides to deploy a tower close to each of these homes.

First, a little research on Google Earth gives us the GPS coordinates of the Samples and

Ridgely home. Putting the street addresses provides us not only with an aerial of the home and

neighborhood, but also the precise location as to where the towers may be deployed.

In the Chase GUI window, select the "Blue Tarp" setting. Type in the GPS coordinates

for the towers into the Latitude and Longitude edit boxes. When finished, click on the "Update

Next" button to append the list. Do this for the Jones and Smith home. When completed, click on

the "Load Layout" button to visualize the layout. Then click on the "Write KML" button to

complete the design process in Chase. Figure All displays the completed Blue Tarp design

process.

Red Rover Deployment

To finish the layout design, click on the "Red Rover" button to change the layout setting.

Select three towers, 12 statute miles to maximum winds, eight statute miles inland, and a cluster

spacing of one statute mile. Click on the "Load Layout" button to verify the tower locations.

Finally, create the KML file. Refer to Figure Al2 for a visualization of the completed Red Rover

layout design process.

Deployment Integration

The final process is to combine the tower deployments, and is begun by loading Google

Earth. Drag and drop both KML files located in the Chase root directory. Finally, observe both

deployments together in Figure Al3.












5mRIe~20

:I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ TI(jrprplr -rmr11 r r.I1i






? 6 26 -i 75 6
2 ?? 12 26 -76. 4
r 'E 15 2i, j -71 2
J 6 O 7 1 -791l
6 '6 17 ?? -81l 6
7 6 11 2J r -526





1;
1-
IV
** I sheel~~fT~ gi~rij 0 |>I
|ReadJy


Figure A-2. Chase Root Directory.


Figure A-1. Proj ected Path Spreadsheet.


Ida~l ill l~r .. Fja.,..( Til: 1-ki


~.i, Search


B8ack


Address Links


.Y 1 .. I I-.- .-I ~ ..3...... I

.r17 l"( ... ( 1_1. 1 m Ins..-L r u~i .a..r~


SHX !'' I


[SHP l~.

3'F I- dbt


Falders : ~.IX~III





































Figure A-3. Initial Chase GUI Window.


I


Figure A-4. Loaded Hurricane Track.

















Latitude Longitlice
1 27.5776 -80.5061
227.5815 -80.5218
327.5864 -80.5376
4T -89 -80 3fi





rll Tb lll lyr nu~l~ .,ar+.Manseei1Ig


15 1 1 If 1 HH


* 15


Figure A-5. Loaded Deployment Layout.


Figure A-6. Written KML File.
















~B c~ _I p ~Search 5Folders/ _, -X 9lrl Address U~nks


j i C h a s e m o 1 4e I ; 9 8 K;P aeb

Chase m~ain Chase_meomponent _data Frances2004
C Source C Source Microsoft Excel Wnorksheet
31~ KB7K 4K

.I Jeartre20l04 mafxdudded~ies usastatelo
r IMicrosoft Excel Workrsheet Text Document AutoCAD Shape Sourrce

usatatlousastatrio usastatelo~dbf
AutoCAD Complled Shape Text Doumentl DBF File
SHlX 1 KB 1 B 3 KBe

0 FCMP Huricane Jeanne 2004
annonball Run
KHL Google Earth KMt.







Figure A-7. Chase Root Directory after Completion.


Figure A-8. Loaded KML in Google Earth.



































Figure A-9. Info Box of Selected Tower.


Figure A-10. Google Earth Close-up of FCMP Tower.





1 27.4883 -80.3000
2 27.6123 -80.3969


YCINU~ VVIIYYVV IC~
o dB ~ a s s ~1 ~ si rs o B ~
1JI.,2 IdP ~111111~ln. JI11.~l(lOlrl I

I?~I.1II- hll;b I hlL11ll.l


282


LOAD DEP.LO':LI


I I


Figure A-11. Completed Blue Tarp Process and Chase GUI.


G~ a ~ n i 9 9 F5 8 Q i e3 ~ i ~ ~


Figure A-12. Completed Red Rover Process and Chase GUI.


LOAD DEF'L i~iil~




































Figure A-13. Google Earth Screenshot of Mixed Deployment.









LIST OF REFERENCES


American Forest & Paper Association, Inc. National Design Specifieation: Design Values for
Wood Construction Supplement. Washington, D.C.: American Forest & Paper
Association, 2005.

Applied Research Associates. HAZUS Wind Loss Estimation Methodology. Raleigh, North
Carolina: Applied Research Associates, 2000.

American Society of Civil Engineers. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and other Structures
(ASCE 7-02). Reston Virginia: American Society of Civil Engineers, 2002.

Cheple, Marilou, and Patrick H. Huelman. "Literature Review of Exterior Insulation Finish
Systems and Stucco Finishes." University of Minnesota Cold Climate Housing Program
15 February 2000. 1 February 2007
http://www. state.mn.us/mn/externalDocs/Commerce/Stucc Study 111302112348 Stuc


Cope, Anne D. "Predicting the Vulnerability of Typical Residential Buildings to Hurricane
Damage." Ph. D. Dissertation, Gainesville, Florida: University of Florida Press, 2004.

Gurley, Kurt. "Post 2004 Hurricane Field Survey-an Evaluation of the Relative Performance of
the Standard Building Code and the Florida Building Code." Florida Building Commission
April 2006. 1 February 2007
http://www.dca. state.fl.us/FBC/commission/FBC_0606/Summary_Briefinn.pdf.

Lampo, Richard G., and Jonathon Trovillion. "Use of Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems on
U.S. Army Facilities." Exterior Insulation Finish Systems: Materials, Properties and
Performance (STP 1269). Ed. Peter E. Nelson and Richard E. Kroll. Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania: American Society for Testing and Materials, 1996.

Lampo, Richard G., and Jonathon Trovillion. "Performance of Class PB and Class PM Exterior
Insulation and Finish Systems under Various Impact Loadings." Development, Use, and
Performance of Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems (STP 1 187). Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania: American Society for Testing and Materials, 1995.

Lee, Brian E., and John Willis. "Vulnerability of Fully Glazed High-Rise Buildings in Tropical
Cyclones." Journal of Architectural Engineering June 2002. 1 February 2007
http ://scitation.aip.ore,/Retpdf/serylet/GetPDSerylet?Hiletype=pdf&id= JAEIED00000800
0002000042000001l&idtype=cvips&pron=normal

Minor, Joseph E., and H. Scott Norville. "Design of Window Glass for Lateral Pressures."
Journal ofArchitectural Engineering September 2006. 1 February 2007
http://scitation.aip.org/epd/eyltGtPFeyltHetyp/s rvepdi= JED001200
0003 0001 16000001 &idtype=cvips&pron=normal










Saxe, Timothy J., Richard A. Behr, Joseph E. Minor, Paul A. Kremer, and Lokeswarappa R.
Dharani. "Effects of Missile Size and Glass Type on Impact Resistance of "Sacrificial
Ply" Laminated Glass." Journal ofArchitectural Engineering March 2002. 1 February
2007
http ://scitation.aip.org,/Retpdf/serylet/GetPDSerylet?filetype=pdf&id= JAEIED00000800
0001000024000001l&idtype=cvips&prog,=normal

Simiu, Emil, and Robert H. Scanlan. Wind Effects on Structures. New York, New York: John
Wiley & Sons, 1996.

Suiker, Akke S., Ernest T. Selig, and Raymond Frenkel. "Static and Cyclic Tri-axial Testing of
Ballast and Sub-ballast." Journal of Geotechnical and' Geo-environmental Engineering
June 2005. 1 February 2007
http ://scitation.aip.org,/Retpdf/serylet/GetPDSerylet?filetype=pdf&id=JAEIED00000800
0001000024000001l&idtvoe=cvios&orog=normal









BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Felix was born and raised in Miami, Florida. In high school, he enrolled in various

Advanced Placement courses, represented his high school in numerous mathematics

competitions, and played saxophone in his school jazz, symphonic, and marching band. He

graduated in the top 3 percent of his high school class at G. Holmes Braddock Senior High as an

AP Scholar with Distinction. A recipient of the Florida Bright Futures Scholarship, Felix

attended Florida International University before transferring to University of Florida. As an

undergraduate student, he participated in many engineering organizations and competitions,

including the American Society of Civil Engineering Conference. He completed a double maj or

in December 2005, earning a bachelor' s degree in civil and coastal engineering and in

mathematics. For his graduate studies, Felix studied under the direction of Dr. Kurt Gurley, and

assisted in various hurricane deployments, including wind observation tower setup and pressure

instrumentation proj ects the Florida Coastal Monitoring Program. His primary interests lie in

hurricane damage mitigation, and structural mechanics.