Seismic Fragility Curves for Reinforced Concrete Dual System Buildings
Pearl Tower as Case Study
Abstract
A seismic fragility curve is a visual representation that illustrates the likelihood of a structure surpassing a particular damage or performance limit state caused by an earthquake with a specific intensity or ground motion level. This curve is typically generated using probabilistic seismic hazard analysis and structural reliability analysis methods. It is based on statistical models that rely on past earthquake data and simulations of future earthquake scenarios to predict the structure or system’s behavior under seismic forces. In this study, the seismic performance of 30 stories of 95 m height dual system reinforced concrete buildings located in Erbil is evaluated by analyzing three distinct ground motions. A non-linear platform is used to simulate and analyze data, followed by the generation of seismic inter-story drift fragility curves using Incremental Dynamic Analysis. The buildings’ seismic structural performance is assessed based on five different performance levels, including operational phase, immediate occupancy, damage control, life safety, and collapse prevention (CP). Each level is associated with different levels of damage and corresponding degrees of functionality and safety. The fragility curves show that the building has a 50% chance of achieving or exceeding the (CP) level with highly intense ground vibrations with peak ground acceleration = 1.6 g. In addition, these curves can be beneficial in creating future local design codes and provide significant support in evaluating the seismic performance of existing buildings.
Downloads
References
Abduljaleel, Z.A., Taha, B.O., and Yaseen, A.A., 2021. Seismic vulnerability assessment of Rizgary hospital building in Erbil City, the capital city of KR of Iraq. Journal of Engineering, 27(8), pp. 59-79.
Aishwarya, S., and Mohan, N., 2014. Vunerability analysis by the development of fragility curves. IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSRJMCE), 11(2), pp. 33-40.
ASCE, American Society of Civil Engineering., 2016. Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures. ASCE/SEI, United States.
Baker, S., Lesaux, N., Jayanthi, M., Dimino, J., Proctor, C.P., Morris, J., Gersten, R., Haymond, K., Kieffer, M.J., and Linan-Thompson, S. 2014. Teaching academic content and literacy to english learners in elementary and middle school. In: IES Practice Guide, NCEE 2014-4012. What Works Clearinghouse, United States.
Berkeley, U.C., n.d. Ground Motion Selection and Modification (GMSM) Program. Available from: https://apps.peer.berkeley.edu/gmsm/home [Last accessed on 2023 Jun 10].
Charalambos, G., Dimitrios, V., and Symeon., C., 2014. Damage assessment, cost estimating, and scheduling for post-earthquake building rehabilitation using BIM. In: Computing in Civil and Building Engineering (2014). ASCE, United States, pp. 398-405.
Di Ludovico, M., Polese, M., d’Aragona, M.G., Prota, A., and Manfredi, G., 2013. A proposal for plastic hinges modification factors for damaged RC columns. Engineering Structures, 51, pp. 99-112.
Dolsek, M., 2009. Incremental dynamic analysis with consideration of modeling uncertainties. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 38, pp.805-825.
Farsangi, E.N., Rezvani, F.H., Talebi, M., and Hashemi, S.A.H., 2014. Seismic risk analysis of steel-MRFs by means of fragility curves in high seismic zones. Advances in Structural Engineering, 17(9), pp. 1227-1240.
FEMA 273, 1997. NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, prepared by the Building Seismic Safety Council. (FEMA Publication No. 273).
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C. Fragiadakis, M., and Vamvatsikos, D., 2010. Fast performance uncertainty estimation via pushover and approximate IDA. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 39(6), pp. 683-703.
Hancilar, U., Cakti, E., Erdik, M., Franco, G., and Deodatis, G., 2014. Earthquake vulnerability of school buildings: Probabilistic structural fragility analyses. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 67, pp. 169-178.
Haselton, C., Whittaker, A., Hortacsu, A., Baker, J., Bray, J., and Grant, D., 2012. Selecting and Scaling Earthquake Ground Motions for Performing Responsehistory Analyses. In: Proceedings of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 2012. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, CA, USA, pp. 4207-4217.
Ibrahim, Y.E., and El-Shami, M.M., 2011. Seismic fragility curves for mid-rise reinforced concrete frames in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The IES Journal Part A: Civil and Structural Engineering, 4, pp. 213-223.
Jalayer, F., and Cornell, C., 2009. Alternative non‐linear demand estimation methods for probability‐based seismic assessments. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 38, pp. 951-972.
Lee, S.G., Kim, D.H., and Lee, I.K., 2014. Seismic fragility analysis of 5 MW offshore wind turbine. Renewable Energy, 65, pp. 250-256.
Lee, Y.J., and Moon, D.S., 2014. A new methodology of the development of seismic fragility curves. Smart Structures and Systems, 14(5), pp. 847-867.
Liel, A.B., Haselton, C.B., Deierlein, G.G., and Baker, J.W., 2009. Incorporating modeling uncertainties in the assessment of seismic collapse risk of buildings. Structural Safety, 31, pp. 197-211.
Mosalam, K.M., White, R.N., and Gergely, P., 1997. Static response of infilled frames using quasi-static experimentation. Journal of Structural Engineering, 123(11), pp. 1462-4169.
Pagani, M., Monelli, D., Weatherill, G., Danciu, L., Crowley, H., Silva, V., Henshaw, P., Butler, L., Nastasi, M., and Panzeri, L., 2014. OpenQuake engine: An open hazard (and risk) software for the global earthquake model. Seismological Research Letters, 85, pp. 692-702.
Raghunandan, M., Liel, A.B., and Luco, N., 2014. Aftershock collapse vulnerability assessment of reinforced concrete frame structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 44(3), pp. 419-439.
SCEC, 2012. Report on the August 2012, Brawley Earthquake Swarm in Imperial Valley, Southern California. Southern California Earthquake Center, USA. Available from: https://www.scec.org/publication/1678 [Last accessed on 2023 Jun 10].
SEiSMOSOFT, 2023. Earthquake Software for Response Spectrum Matching. Earthquake Engineering Software Solutions.
Sudret, B., Mai, C., and Konakli, K., 2014. Assessment of the lognormality assumption of seismic fragility curves using non-parametric representations. arXiv preprint arXiv:1403.5481.
USGS Earthquake, n.d. Earthquakes: U.S. Geological Survey. Available from: https://www.usgs.gov/programs/earthquake-hazards/earthquakes [Last accessed on 2023 Jun 10].
Vamvatsikos, D., and Cornell, C.A., 2002. Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 31, pp. 491-514.
Vamvatsikos, D., and Cornell, C.A., 2004. Applied incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Spectra, 20, pp. 523-553.
Vamvatsikos, D., and Fragiadakis, M., 2010. Incremental dynamic analysis for estimating seismic performance sensitivity and uncertainty. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 39, pp.141-163.
Vona, M., 2014. Fragility curves of existing RC buildings based on specific structural performance levels. Open Journal of Civil Engineering, 4, 120.
Wang, Y., and Rosowsky, D.V., 2014. Effects of earthquake ground motion selection and scaling method on performance-based engineering of wood-frame structures. Journal of Structural Engineering, 142(10), pp. 04014086-1-11.
Xue, Q., Wu, C.W., Chen, C.C., and Chen, K.C., 2008. The draft code for performance-based seismic design of buildings in Taiwan. Engineering Structures, 30, pp. 1535-1547
Copyright (c) 2023 Sarwar S. Ismael, Faris R. Ahmed
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who choose to publish their work with Aro agree to the following terms:
-
Authors retain the copyright to their work and grant the journal the right of first publication. The work is simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License [CC BY-NC-SA 4.0]. This license allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
-
Authors have the freedom to enter into separate agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work. This includes options such as posting it to an institutional repository or publishing it in a book, as long as proper acknowledgement is given to its initial publication in this journal.
-
Authors are encouraged to share and post their work online, including in institutional repositories or on their personal websites, both prior to and during the submission process. This practice can lead to productive exchanges and increase the visibility and citation of the published work.
By agreeing to these terms, authors acknowledge the importance of open access and the benefits it brings to the scholarly community.
ARO Journal is a scientific, peer-reviewed, periodical, and OAJ that has no APC or ASC.