Earthquakes and Structures

  • 제10권2호
  • /
  • Pages.429-450
  • /
  • 2016
  • /
  • 2092-7614(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2092-7622(eISSN)
테크노프레스 (Techno-Press)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Incorporation of collapse safety margin into direct earthquake loss estimate

  • Xian, Lina (College of Resources and Civil Engineering, Northeastern University) ;
  • He, Zheng (Department of Civil Engineering, Dalian University of Technology) ;
  • Ou, Xiaoying (College of Civil and Safety Engineering, Dalian Jiaotong University)
  • 투고 : 2015.06.06
  • 심사 : 2015.10.15
  • 발행 : 2016.02.25
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

An attempt has been made to incorporate the concept of collapse safety margin into the procedures proposed in the performance-based earthquake engineering (PBEE) framework for direct earthquake loss estimation, in which the collapse probability curve obtained from incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) is mathematically characterized with the S-type fitting model. The regressive collapse probability curve is then used to identify non-collapse cases and collapse cases. With the assumed lognormal probability distribution for non-collapse damage indexes, the expected direct earthquake loss ratio is calculated from the weighted average over several damage states for non-collapse cases. Collapse safety margin is shown to be strongly related with sustained damage endurance of structures. Such endurance exhibits a strong link with expected direct earthquake loss. The results from the case study on three concrete frames indicate that increase in cross section cannot always achieve a more desirable output of collapse safety margin and less direct earthquake loss. It is a more effective way to acquire wider collapse safety margin and less direct earthquake loss through proper enhancement of reinforcement in structural components. Interestingly, total expected direct earthquake loss ratio seems to be insensitive a change in cross section. It has demonstrated a consistent correlation with collapse safety margin. The results also indicates that, if direct economic loss is seriously concerned, it is of much significance to reduce the probability of occurrence of moderate and even severe damage, as well as the probability of structural collapse.

키워드

과제정보

연구 과제 주관 기관 : National Natural Science Foundation of China, Ministry of China

참고문헌

  1. ATC (2009), Guidelines for seismic performance assessment of buildings, ATC-58, Applied Technology Council, Redwood, California, USA.
  2. ATC (2010), Quantification of building seismic performance factors, ATC-63, Applied Technology Council, Redwood, California, USA.
  3. Aslani, H. (2005), "Probabilistic earthquake loss estimation and loss disaggregation in buildings". Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, California, USA.
  4. Baker, J.W., Cornell, C.A. (2003), Uncertainty specification and propagation for loss estimation using FOSM methods. PEER Report 2003/07, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, California, USA.
  5. Bazzurro, P. and Nicolas, L. (2005), "Accounting for uncertainty and correlation in earthquake loss estimation", International Conference on Structural Safety and Reliability (ICOSSAR 2005), Rotterdam, Holland.
  6. Bradley, B.A. (2009), User manual for SLAT: Seismic loss assessment Tool version 1.14, Report 2009-01, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
  7. Bradley, B.A., Dhakal, R.P., Cubrinovski, M., MacRae, G.A. and Lee, D.S. (2008), "Seismic loss estimation for efficient decision making", New Zealand Society of Earthquake Engineering (NZSEE) Conference, Wairakei, New Zealand.
  8. Bruneau, M. Chang, S.E., Eguchi, R.T., Lee, G.C., O‟Rourke, T.D., Reinhorn, A.M., Shinozuka, M., Tierney, K., Wallace, W.A. and Winterfeldt, D.V. (2003), "A framework to quantitatively assess and enhance the seismic resilience of communities", Earthq. Spectra, 19(4), 733-752. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1623497
  9. Chen, H.F., Sun, B.T. and Chen, X.Z. (2013), "HAZ-China earthquake disaster loss estimation system", China Civ. Eng. J., 46(Sup. 2), 294-300. (in Chinese)
  10. Chen, Y., Chen, Q.F. and Chen, L. (2001), "Vulnerability analysis in earthquake loss estimate", Nat. Haz., 23(2-3), 349-364. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011181803564
  11. Chopra, A.K. and Goel, R.K. (2002), "A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 31(3), 561-582. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.144
  12. Cao, V.V., Ronagh, H.R., Ashraf, M. and Baji, H. (2014), "A new damage index for reinforced concrete structures", Earthq. Struct., 6(6), 581-609. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2014.6.6.581
  13. DiPasquale, E., Ju, J.W. and Askar, A. (1990), "Relation between global damage indices and local stiffness degradation", J. Struct. Eng., ASCE, 116(5), 1440-1456. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1990)116:5(1440)
  14. Djordje, L. and Radomir, F. (2004), "Application of improved damage index for designing of earthquake resistant structures", Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (13WCEE), Paper ID:67, Vancouver, Canada.
  15. Elenas, A. and Meskouris, K. (2001), "Correlation study between seismic acceleration parameters and damage indices of structures", Eng. Struct., 23(2001), 698-704. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(00)00074-2
  16. FEMA (2000), Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings, FEMA-356, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Reston, Virginia, USA.
  17. FEMA (2009). HAZUS-MH MR4 technical and user's manual, Washington, DC, USA.
  18. Ghobarah, A., ABOU-elfath, H. and Biddah, A. (1999), "Response-based damage assessment of structures", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 28(1), 79-104. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199901)28:1<79::AID-EQE805>3.0.CO;2-J
  19. Gunturi, S. and Shah, H. (1993), "Building-specific earthquake damage estimation", Ph.D. Dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
  20. GB50011-2010 (2010), Code for seismic design of buildings, China building industry press, Beijing, China (in Chinese).
  21. GB/T18208.4-2011 (2011), Post-earthquake field works-Part 4: Assessment of direct loss seismological, Chinese National Standards. Beijing, China. (in Chinese)
  22. Haselton, C.B., Liel, A.B., Deierlein, G.G., Dean, B.S. and Chou, J.H. (2011), "Seismic collapse safety of reinforced concrete buildings: I. Assessment of ductile moment frames", J. Struct. Eng., 137(4), 481-491. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000318
  23. He, Z., Ou, X.Y. and Ou, J.P. (2014), "A macro-level global seismic damage model considering higher modes", Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib., 13(3), 425-436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-014-0253-x
  24. Krawinkler, H. (2002), Seismic Demand Analysis, Annual meeting research digest. Bulletin No.2002-1, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, California, USA.
  25. Kim, J. and Baek, D. (2013), "Seismic risk assessment of staggered wall system structures", Earthq. Struct., 5(5),607-624. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2013.5.5.607
  26. Kappos, A.J., Panagopoulos, G.K., Sextos, A.G., Papanikolaou, V.K. and Stylianidis, K.C. (2010), "Development of comprehensive earthquake loss scenarios for a Greek and a Turkish city-structural aspects", Earthq. Struct., 1(2),197-214. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2010.1.2.197
  27. Liel, A.B., Haselton, C.B. and Deierlein, G.G. (2011), "Seismic collapse safety of reinforced concrete buildings. II: Comparative assessment of nonductile and ductile moment frames", J. Struct. Eng., 137(4), 492-502. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000275
  28. Lu, X.Z., Tang, D.Y., Ye, L.P. and Shi, W. (2011), "Study on the seismic collapse resistance of RC frame structures with equal spans in 7-degree seismic intensity zone", J. Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib., 31(5), 13-20. (in Chinese)
  29. Mander, J.B., Sircar, J. and Damnjanovic, I. (2012), "Direct loss model for seismically damage structures", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 41(3), 571-586. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1148
  30. Mazzoni, S., McKenna, F., Scott, M.H. and Fenves, G.L. (2011), "Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (OpenSees) command language manual", http://opensees.berkeley.edu/wiki/index.php/Command_Manual. OpenSEES v2.4.3 [Computer software]. Berkeley, CA, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
  31. Mieler, M.W., Stojadinovic, B., Budnitz, R.J., Mahin, S.A. and Comerio, M.C. (2013), Toward resilient communities: A performance-based engineering framework for design and evaluation of the built environment, PEER Report 2013/19, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, California, USA.
  32. Miranda, E. and Aslani, H. (2003), Probabilistic response assessment for building-specific loss estimation, PEER Report 2003/03, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, California, USA.
  33. Miranda, E., Aslani, H. and Taghavi, S. (2004), Assessment of seismic performance in terms of economic losses, PEER Report 2004/05, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, California, USA.
  34. Moehle, J. and Deierlein, G.G. (2004), "A framework methodology for performance-based earthquake engineering", Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (13WCEE), Vancouver, Canada.
  35. Park, Y.J. and Ang, A.H.S. (1985), "Mechanical seismic damage model for reinforced concrete", J. Struct. Eng., 111(4), 722-739. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1985)111:4(722)
  36. PEER Strong Motion Database (2013), http://peer.berkeley.edu/smcat/. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Center.
  37. Porter, K., Kennedy, R. and Bachman, R. (2007), "Creating fragility functions for performance-based earthquake engineering", Earthq. Spectra, 23(2), 471-489. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2720892
  38. Porter, K.A., Kiremidjian, A.S. and LeGrue, J.S. (2001), "Assembly-based vulnerability of buildings and its use in performance evaluation", Earthq. Spectra, 17(2), 291-312. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586176
  39. Ramirez, C.M. and Miranda, E. (2009), Building-specific loss estimation methods & tools for simplified performance-based earthquake engineering, Report No.171, John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, California, USA.
  40. Robertson, K.L. (2005), "Probabilistic seismic design and assessment methodologies for the new generation of damage resistant structures", Master Dissertation, University of Canterbury, Canterbury, New Zealand.
  41. Rodriguez, M.E. and Padilla, D. (2009), "A damage index for the seismic analysis of reinforced concrete members", J. Earthq. Eng., 13(3), 364-383. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460802597893
  42. Scholl, R.E. (1979), Seismic damage assessment for high-rise building, Annual technical report, John A. Blume & Associates, California, USA.
  43. Shome, N. (1999), "Probabilistic seismic demand analysis of nonlinear structures", Ph.D. Dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
  44. Shome, N. and Cornell, C.A. (2000), "Structural seismic demand analysis: consideration of „collapse‟, Proceedings CD-Rom of the 8th ACSE/SEI/GI/AD Joint Specialty Conference on Probabilistic Mechanics and Structural Reliability. Notre Dame, Indiana, USA.
  45. Vamvatsikos, D. and Cornell, C.A. (2002), "Incremental dynamic analysis", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 31(3),491-541. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.141

피인용 문헌

  1. Web based evaluation of earthquake damages for reinforced concrete buildings vol.13, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2017.13.4.387
  2. The effect of finite element modeling assumptions on collapse capacity of an RC frame building vol.18, pp.5, 2020, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2020.18.5.555
  3. A case study for determination of seismic risk priorities in Van (Eastern Turkey) vol.20, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2021.20.4.445