1997
DOI: 10.1193/1.1585974
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development of Building Damage Functions for Earthquake Loss Estimation

Abstract: This paper describes building damage functions that were developed for the FEMA/NIBS earthquake loss estimation methodology (Whitman et al., 1997). These functions estimate the probability of discrete states of structural and nonstructural building damage that are used as inputs to the estimation of building losses, including economic loss, casualties and loss of function (Kircher et al., 1997). These functions are of a new form and represent a significant step forward in the prediction of earthquake impacts. … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
131
0
7

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 255 publications
(139 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
131
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…This methodology has been applied to different earthquake cases (De Luca et al 2013a;Manfredi et al 2013), such as Lorca (2011), Spain, and Emilia (2012), Italy. The approach belongs to the wider family of vulnerability assessment methodologies based on spectral displacements (e.g., Kircher et al 1997;Erdik et al 2004, among others) in which damage states are classified according to the 1998 European Macroseismic Scale (Grünthal et al 1998). On the other hand, in analogy with other vulnerability approaches available in literature (e.g., Ricci 2010), it is able to capture the structural contribution provided by nonstructural masonry infills.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This methodology has been applied to different earthquake cases (De Luca et al 2013a;Manfredi et al 2013), such as Lorca (2011), Spain, and Emilia (2012), Italy. The approach belongs to the wider family of vulnerability assessment methodologies based on spectral displacements (e.g., Kircher et al 1997;Erdik et al 2004, among others) in which damage states are classified according to the 1998 European Macroseismic Scale (Grünthal et al 1998). On the other hand, in analogy with other vulnerability approaches available in literature (e.g., Ricci 2010), it is able to capture the structural contribution provided by nonstructural masonry infills.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…), düşey eksen ise yapısal hasarın belli bir hasar düzeyine erişmesinin veya aşmasının yığışımlı olasılığını göstermektedir. Deprem hasarlarının olasılıksal dağılımının log-normal dağılıma uyduğu varsayımı ile her bir hasar düzeyi için olasılık eğrisinin analitik ifadesi aşağıdaki biçimde yazılabilir [25,26]:…”
Section: Yapısal Kırılganlık (Olasılıksal Hasar) Fonksiyonlarıunclassified
“…An analytical method for estimating seismic fragility that uses nonlinear pseudostatic structural analysis is described by Kircher et al (1997), where the lateral force versus the lateral displacement curve of the building structure, idealized as an equivalent nonlinear, single degree of freedom (SDOF) system, is obtained. This curve is transformed to the spectral displacement-spectral acceleration space to obtain the so-called capacity spectrum.…”
Section: Fragility Functionsmentioning
confidence: 99%