When disaster strikes, hospitals and schools often become the last bastions of safety, yet they are also frequently the hardest-hit locations. These public buildings fulfill society’s most essential functions—medical care and education—and their seismic resilience directly impacts the survival of countless lives and the stability of society. Therefore, enhancing the seismic resilience of public buildings such as hospitals and schools is not merely an engineering challenge; it is an essential path to safeguarding social security and preserving the flame of civilization.
The starting point of this journey toward improvement lies in a profound understanding of their unique nature. Unlike ordinary buildings, hospitals and schools must maintain uninterrupted operations or be able to recover quickly after an earthquake. Hospitals must ensure the operation of operating rooms, intensive care units, and emergency access routes; life-support systems such as electricity, water, and oxygen supply must never fail. Schools, meanwhile, serve not only as shelters for students but also as critical hubs for post-disaster community rescue and information gathering. Structural safety is merely the baseline; functional resilience is the core objective. This means that seismic design must shift from merely “staying upright” to “remaining functional,” evolving from protecting the building itself to ensuring the continuous operation of its internal systems.
Achieving this goal requires a multi-pronged technical strategy. First is the innovation of structural systems. Traditional seismic design primarily focused on load-bearing structures, but today, performance-based seismic design is increasingly becoming the mainstream approach. For example, the use of base isolation technology—installing isolation bearings at the building’s base, akin to fitting the building with “skateboards”—can effectively dissipate seismic energy and significantly reduce vibrations in the superstructure. For critical functional areas in hospitals, a “room-within-a-room” localized isolation scheme can even be employed to ensure that core medical equipment remains rock-solid during strong earthquakes. At the same time, energy-dissipating and vibration-reducing technologies—such as the installation of metal dampers or viscous dampers—function like “shock absorbers” for the building, actively absorbing seismic energy to protect the main structure.
Second, there is the reinforcement of non-structural components and system safeguards. Past seismic disasters have shown that the loss of hospital functionality and casualties are often caused by the failure of non-structural components: ceiling collapses, pipe ruptures, overturned medical equipment, and peeling exterior wall cladding. Therefore, systematic seismic retrofitting of suspended ceilings, curtain walls, piping, mechanical and electrical equipment, and large storage cabinets is just as important as reinforcing the main structure. Life-support systems—such as medical gas systems, emergency power supply systems, and information networks—must be incorporated into the overall seismic assessment and design scope to ensure their connectivity and reliability during earthquakes.
Furthermore, there is the issue of resilience retrofitting for existing buildings. China has a large number of hospital and school buildings constructed under early seismic code standards, and conducting scientific assessments and retrofitting for these structures is currently the most urgent task. Retrofitting is not merely a superficial “cosmetic upgrade,” but requires targeted solutions based on thorough inspection and assessment. This may involve adding shear walls or steel bracing to enhance overall strength, or employing new technologies such as carbon fiber fabric wrapping for localized reinforcement. The retrofitting process must also fully account for the practical challenges of maintaining hospital operations and school classes without interruption, necessitating meticulous construction planning and phased implementation.
Finally, this path cannot be achieved without the simultaneous upgrading of systems, standards, and public awareness. The government must refine mandatory standards, incorporating seismic resilience requirements for public buildings—particularly those related to maintaining functionality—into regulations and approval processes. Investment mechanisms must be innovated, recognizing that seismic investment is the most cost-effective form of “insurance,” and establishing long-term fiscal safeguards. Professional training for designers, construction personnel, and managers must be strengthened to ensure that the concept of resilience is integrated throughout the entire building lifecycle. Conducting regular specialized emergency drills for hospitals and schools, so that everyone in the building is familiar with earthquake response procedures, is equally an indispensable soft component of resilience-building.
Safeguarding these lifelines extends far beyond the scope of civil engineering. It represents the utmost respect for life and a responsible investment in society’s future development. Every enhancement to the seismic resilience of public buildings strengthens the framework of our society’s disaster resilience, reserving more light of life amidst the darkness of disaster. This path of upgrading is long and arduous, but every step firmly leads toward a safer, more resilient tomorrow. It requires us to use technology as our shield and responsibility as our driving force, ensuring that hospitals remain reliable sanctuaries and that the sound of learning in schools is never silenced by disaster—truly fortifying a strong line of defense to safeguard lives.
发表回复