Single Building Seismic Risk Assessment Including the Vertical Component: Quantitative Comparison, Intensity Measures, and Nonstructural Fragility Uncertainties

IF 4.3 2区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, CIVIL
Georgios Triantafyllou, Mohsen Kohrangi, Dimitrios Vamvatsikos, Paolo Bazzurro
{"title":"Single Building Seismic Risk Assessment Including the Vertical Component: Quantitative Comparison, Intensity Measures, and Nonstructural Fragility Uncertainties","authors":"Georgios Triantafyllou,&nbsp;Mohsen Kohrangi,&nbsp;Dimitrios Vamvatsikos,&nbsp;Paolo Bazzurro","doi":"10.1002/eqe.4336","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>The objective of this study is to investigate whether the additional damage to building components caused by vertical ground shaking and its impact on estimated monetary losses warrants the extra computational effort needed to include this feature for standard risk assessment applications. As a case study, we consider a 2D model of a modern nine-story steel frame building located at a high seismic hazard site in California. The structural and nonstructural demands are assessed via nonlinear dynamic analysis carried out using hazard-consistent bi-directional (horizontal &amp; vertical) ground motion records. We estimated the seismic losses with and without the vertical ground motion using a component-based loss estimation approach based on FEMA-P58. We also explored the sensitivity of the loss estimates to the characteristics of the input vertical acceleration fragility curves. Analysis results indicate a modest increase in the average annual losses (AAL) when the vertical component is included, consistent with the relatively small fraction of the total building replacement cost assigned to components sensitive to vertical motion. We also investigate the sensitivity of the loss estimates to the conditioning ground motion intensity measure adopted in the risk assessment procedure. Considerable discrepancies are observed in the loss estimates on an intensity basis and, to a lesser degree, on a risk basis. Among the tested intensity measures, average spectral acceleration performs better than single-period spectral accelerations in two regards: it provides higher efficiency, and it maintains good consistency of the selected records with the site hazard while using lower levels of ground motion amplitude scaling. Whereas single-period spectral ordinates that will approximate these advantages may exist, finding them requires some investigation.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11390,"journal":{"name":"Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics","volume":"54 7","pages":"1819-1835"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eqe.4336","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The objective of this study is to investigate whether the additional damage to building components caused by vertical ground shaking and its impact on estimated monetary losses warrants the extra computational effort needed to include this feature for standard risk assessment applications. As a case study, we consider a 2D model of a modern nine-story steel frame building located at a high seismic hazard site in California. The structural and nonstructural demands are assessed via nonlinear dynamic analysis carried out using hazard-consistent bi-directional (horizontal & vertical) ground motion records. We estimated the seismic losses with and without the vertical ground motion using a component-based loss estimation approach based on FEMA-P58. We also explored the sensitivity of the loss estimates to the characteristics of the input vertical acceleration fragility curves. Analysis results indicate a modest increase in the average annual losses (AAL) when the vertical component is included, consistent with the relatively small fraction of the total building replacement cost assigned to components sensitive to vertical motion. We also investigate the sensitivity of the loss estimates to the conditioning ground motion intensity measure adopted in the risk assessment procedure. Considerable discrepancies are observed in the loss estimates on an intensity basis and, to a lesser degree, on a risk basis. Among the tested intensity measures, average spectral acceleration performs better than single-period spectral accelerations in two regards: it provides higher efficiency, and it maintains good consistency of the selected records with the site hazard while using lower levels of ground motion amplitude scaling. Whereas single-period spectral ordinates that will approximate these advantages may exist, finding them requires some investigation.

包括竖向构件在内的单栋建筑地震风险评估:定量比较、强度测量和非结构脆弱性不确定性
本研究的目的是调查垂直地面震动对建筑构件造成的额外损害及其对估计的经济损失的影响是否值得在标准风险评估应用中包括这一特征所需的额外计算工作。作为一个案例研究,我们考虑了一个位于加利福尼亚高地震危险区的现代九层钢框架建筑的二维模型。结构和非结构需求通过非线性动力分析进行评估,采用危险一致的双向(水平&;垂直)地面运动记录。我们使用基于FEMA-P58的基于分量的地震损失估计方法来估计有和没有垂直地面运动的地震损失。我们还探讨了损失估计对输入垂直加速度易损性曲线特征的敏感性。分析结果表明,当包括垂直部分时,平均年损失(AAL)略有增加,这与分配给对垂直运动敏感的部分相对较小的建筑物重置总成本相一致。我们还研究了损失估计对风险评估过程中所采用的地面运动强度测量的敏感性。在以强度为基础的损失估计中发现了相当大的差异,在较小程度上以风险为基础的损失估计也存在差异。在所测试的强度测量中,平均谱加速度比单周期谱加速度在两个方面表现得更好:一是效率更高;二是在使用较低水平的地震动幅度标度的情况下,所选记录与现场危害保持了良好的一致性。虽然可能存在近似这些优点的单周期光谱坐标,但要找到它们还需要一些研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics
Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 工程技术-工程:地质
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
13.30%
发文量
180
审稿时长
4.8 months
期刊介绍: Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics provides a forum for the publication of papers on several aspects of engineering related to earthquakes. The problems in this field, and their solutions, are international in character and require knowledge of several traditional disciplines; the Journal will reflect this. Papers that may be relevant but do not emphasize earthquake engineering and related structural dynamics are not suitable for the Journal. Relevant topics include the following: ground motions for analysis and design geotechnical earthquake engineering probabilistic and deterministic methods of dynamic analysis experimental behaviour of structures seismic protective systems system identification risk assessment seismic code requirements methods for earthquake-resistant design and retrofit of structures.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信