… explained using the example of a storage location
In a previous blog post (https://karl.services/en/building-vulnerabilities/) on the topic of building vulnerability, we extensively explained the concept of vulnerability and its application in the K.A.R.L. risk analysis.
In short, within the context of our natural hazard analysis, the focus is on the specific sensitivity of any given object to the impact of natural hazards. The extent of damage expected upon the occurrence of a particular event depends on the vulnerability.
This post will focus on storage areas and their vulnerability (specific sensitivity) to natural hazards, particularly examining open-air storage areas. This storage situation serves as an excellent example of both the importance of incorporating vulnerability into risk management and the need to avoid excessive complexity on this topic. To grasp the significance, a brief look at the images is sufficient: If an open-air car storage facility (Fig. 1) is hit by a hailstorm, damages quickly accumulate even with relatively small hailstones, as shown in Fig. 3.
Figure 1: Vehicles in an open storage area (symbolic image).
If the same hailstorm moves on and hits the container terminal 200 meters away, the damage is likely to be minimal – assuming there are any significant damages at all.
Figure 2: Port with container terminal (symbolic image).
In any case, dents in a standard container undoubtedly cause less trouble than dents in a new car. The same applies to a storm that, through swirling sand or similar, can quickly lead to paint damage on cars—here again, the containers pose a significantly lesser problem (see also Fig. 4).
Figure 3: Moderate hail damage to a vehicle (symbolic image).
Figure 4: Container stack (symbolic image).
In the case of an earthquake, the situation can reverse: while cars literally “cushion” the event, stacks of containers may topple. Depending on the cargo, this can lead to severe damage to the contents.
It becomes clear how important it is to differentiate between various objects, types of storage goods, and thus the concept of vulnerability.
Where does the meaningful level of detail end?
This question cannot be answered universally but can be well explained using the example of a car storage facility:
At first glance, the idea quickly arises to define different vulnerabilities for significantly different car classes. For instance, SUVs, “regular” sedans, and sports cars differ significantly in their respective ground clearances, affecting when prolonged exposure to water (during floods or heavy rain) may lead to damage. However, large car storage areas rarely have completely uniform topography. Some are structured on multiple levels, and others have a “roof-like” zigzag ground profile with drainage channels. In practice, cars are parked strictly based on logistical requirements, without consideration for the sensitivity of different car types to standing water. Therefore, it is possible that the ultra-low sports car is still dry on a slight elevation, while the SUV in a depression may already have water damage in the interior.
Figure 5: Car in the water (symbolic image).
The detailed differentiation doesn’t bring any advantages in the quality of the results but only adds the extra effort of assigning these specific vulnerabilities to the units before the analysis. The use of a “medium” vulnerability, perhaps based on the height of the sedan, leads in this example to very good results that accurately reflect the actual risk.
Conclusion
Especially on large open-air storage areas (such as those at major ports with international connections), there is a multitude of stored goods, each with varying sensitivities that need to be considered in an analysis to avoid misleading results.
The particular challenge lies in striking a balance between capturing the special characteristics of the most valuable assets as adequately as possible while simultaneously limiting the complexity of vulnerability definitions in a meaningful way.
In the definition of vulnerability curves, navigating the tension between achievable accuracy and practical usability, we have accumulated significant experience in recent years. Based on this experience, we would be pleased to offer you personalized advice.
If you would like to discuss this paper with us, we look forward to hearing from you.
