Modelling considerations in probabilistic performance-based seismic evaluation: Case study of the I-880 viaduct

Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 57-75

  Kunnath, Sashi K ^a   Larson, Leah ^a   Miranda, Eduardo ^b  

^a University of California   (United States)

^b Stanford University   (United States)

Author keywords

Bridge; Fragility functions; Nonlinear time history analysis; Performance based seismic engineering; Seismic evaluation; Soil foundation interaction

Indexed keywords

BRIDGES; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PROBABILITY; RELIABILITY; SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTIONS;

FRAGILITY FUNCTIONS; NONLINEAR TIME-HISTORY ANALYSIS; PERFORMANCE BASED SEISMIC ENGINEERING; SEISMIC EVALUATION;

SEISMOLOGY;

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING; SEISMIC DESIGN; STRUCTURAL RESPONSE; VIADUCT;

EID: 29644435925     PISSN: 00988847     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/eqe.531     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. FEMA-350. Recommended Seismic Design Criteria for New Steel Moment-Frame Buildings. Developed by the SAC Joint Venture for the Federal Emergency Management Agency: Washington, 2000.
2. Cornell CA, Jalayer F, Hamburger RO, Foutch DA. Probabilistic basis for 200 SAC Federal Emergency Management Agency steel moment frame guidelines. Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE) 2002; 128(4):526-533.
3. Benjamin Jr DC, Cornell CA. Probability, Statistics and Decision for Civil Engineers. McGraw-Hill: New York, 1970.
4. Bauer K. Simulation models for the nonlinear seismic response of the I-880 viaduct. M.S. Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Davis, 2003.
5. Jeremic B, Kunnath SK, Xiong F. Influence of soil-foundation-structure interaction on seismic response of the I-880 viaduct. Engineering Structures 2004; 26:391-402.
6. OpenSees. Open system for earthquake engineering simulation. 2004, http://opensees.berkeley.edu.
7. Mander JB, Priestly MJN, Park R. Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete. Journal of the Structural Division, Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers 1988; 114:1805-1825.
8. Kent CD, Park R. Flexural members with confined concrete. Journal of the Structural Division, Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers 1971; 97:1969-1989.
9. Shome N, Cornell CA. Probabilistic seismic demand analysis of nonlinear structures. Report No. RMS-35, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, 1999.
10. Somerville P, Collins N. Ground Motion Time Histories for the 1880 Bridge, Oakland. URS Corporation: Pasadena, CA, 2002.
11. Kennedy RP, Short SA. Basis for seismic provisions of DOE-STD-1020. UCRL-CR-111478, Prepared for U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC, 1994.
12. Sewell RT, Toro GR, McGuire RK. Impact of ground motion characterization on conservatism and variability in seismic risk estimates. Report NUREG/ CR-6467, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 1991.
13. Cornell CA. Calculating building seismic performance reliability; a basis for multi-level design norms. Proceedings of the Eleventh Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Acapulco, Mexico, 1996.
14. Berry M, Eberhard M. Column deformation demands at bar buckling. ASCE Structures Congress, Seattle, 2003.
15. Porter K. A survey of bridge practitioners to relate damage to closure. Report EERL 2004-07, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, 2004; 20.
16. Miranda E, Aslani H. Probabilistic response assessment for building-specific loss estimation. Report 2003/03, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA, 2003; 59.