Development of earthquake vulnerability functions for tall buildings

Abstract

SUMMARY This study focuses on the development of vulnerability functions for tall buildings. A systematic simulation approach based on the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research loss assessment framework is used to develop building vulnerability functions that provide estimates of losses to buildings under ground motions of various intensities. The steps involved in the procedure are: quantifying ground‐motion hazard using a vector of spectral accelerations; predicting building response parameters such as story drifts, floor accelerations, and residual drifts under the quantified hazard; accounting for structural collapse and demolition; and predicting story‐wise losses and total building loss using the building response information. Emphasis is placed on capturing the effects of epistemic and aleatory uncertainties in random variables, such as ground motions, structural response parameters, loss costs, etc., to quantify the uncertainty in the final loss estimate. The risk assessment approach is used for developing vulnerability functions for six tall buildings, namely, 20‐story and 40‐story steel moment resisting frame buildings based on 1973 and 2006 codes, a 42‐story concrete core wall building and a 42‐story concrete dual system building. The vulnerability functions are used to perform loss assessments for individual buildings assumed to be located in Los Angeles. The vulnerability and the loss assessment procedures are illustrated in detail for the 2006 20‐story steel moment frame building, and a summary of the final loss estimates are provided for all other buildings. It is seen that epistemic uncertainties in both ground motion hazard and building vulnerability cause significant epistemic uncertainties in the loss assessment results. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Site dependence and record selection schemes for building fragility and regional loss assessment

“…Then, depending on the desired level of accuracy and simplicity, appropriate structural analysis methods are employed, typically based on either nonlinear static analysis (e.g., capacity-spectrum [17,31,32], displacement-based methods [33,34], etc.) or nonlinear dynamic analysis [19,21,35,36]. In both cases, a major issue is the invariance of a building's (or classof-buildings') vulnerability/fragility function from the site itself.…”

Loss estimation for non‐ductile reinforced concrete building in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada: effects of mega‐thrust Mw9‐class subduction earthquakes and aftershocks

“…In addition, a recent study by AIR Worldwide [5] suggested that regional economic loss associated with a hypothetical M w 9 Cascadia earthquake scenario can be significant.An accurate assessment of potential impact of future destructive earthquakes is essential for effective disaster risk reduction and requires decision-support tools that facilitate the quantitative seismic loss estimation. Probabilistic seismic risk analysis (PSRA) entails comprehensive understanding of ground shaking information, such as fault rupture process, wave propagation, and site effects, as well as vulnerability of structures, such as structural damage accumulation, seismic loss generation, and societal/economic impact [6][7][8]. Through probabilistic calculus, PSRA evaluates the potential damage and loss that a certain group of structures is likely to experience because of various seismic events.A seismic demand model characterizes a probabilistic relationship between seismic intensity measure (IM) and engineering demand parameter (EDP).…”

On the Importance of Brace Connection Modelling for Seismic Performance Assessment of Steel CBFS

“…These were computed following the building-specific storey-based loss estimation methodology proposed by Ramirez et al [21], considering the effect of demolition-related losses [22]. In order to compute the demolition-related losses, the probability of demolition given a residual ISDR, P(D|RISDR), was assumed to follow a lognormal distribution with a median of 1.85% and a logarithmic standard deviation of 0.3 [23]. To what pertains the repair losses, the structural damage fragility curves proposed in HAZUS [24] for high-code steel braced frames were used, in conjunction with the repair cost ratios proposed in HAZUS for multifamily dwellings.…”