Damage-based design with no repairs for multiple events and its sensitivity to seismicity model

Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics

Volumn 36, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 307-325

  Das, S ^a   Gupta, V K ^a   Srimahavishnu, V ^a  

^a INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KANPUR   (India)

Author keywords

Cumulative damage; Design force ratio spectrum; Hazard function; Order statistics; Performance based design; Seismicity model

Indexed keywords

DEGREES OF FREEDOM (MECHANICS); EARTHQUAKE EFFECTS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; WEIBULL DISTRIBUTION; YIELD STRESS;

CUMULATIVE DAMAGE; DESIGN FORCE RATIO SPECTRUM; HAZARD FUNCTION; PERFORMANCE-BASED DESIGN;

SEISMIC DESIGN;

EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE; ELASTOPLASTICITY; NUMERICAL MODEL; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; REPAIR; SEISMIC DESIGN; SEISMICITY; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STRUCTURAL RESPONSE; WEIBULL THEORY;

EID: 33847709418     PISSN: 00988847     EISSN: 10969845     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/eqe.632     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Amadio C, Fragiacomo M, Rajgelj S. The effects of repeated earthquake ground motions on the non-linear response of SDOF systems. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2003; 32:291-308.
2. Ballio G. European approach to design of steel structures. Proceedings of Hong Kong Fourth World Congress, Hong Kong 1990; 935-946.
3. Vidic T, Fajfar P, Fischinger M. Consistent inelastic design spectra: strength and displacement. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1994; 23:507-521.
4. Gutenberg B, Richter CF. Earthquake magnitude, intensity, energy and acceleration. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1942; 32:163-191.
5. Cornell CA, Winterstein SR. Temporal and magnitude dependence in earthquake recurrence models. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1988; 78(4):1522-1537.
6. Esteva L. Geology and probability in the assessment of seismic risk. Proceedings of Second International Congress, International Association of Engineering Geology, San Paulo, Brazil, 1974.
7. Patwardhan AS, Kulkarni RB, Tocher DA. A semi-Markov model for characterizing recurrence of great earthquakes. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1980; 70(1):323-347.
8. Kiremidjian AS, Suzuki SA. A stochastic model for site ground motions from temporally dependent earthquakes. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1987; 77(4): 1110-1126.
9. Nishenko SP, Buland R. A generic recurrence interval distribution for earthquake forecasting. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1987; 77(4): 1382-1399.
10. Kagan YY. Statistics of characteristic earthquakes. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1993; 83(1):7-24.
11. Chen PS, Lin PH. An application of theory of extreme values to moderate and long-interval earthquake prediction. Acta Geophysica 1973; 16:6.
12. Kijiko A, Sellovell MA. Triple-exponential distribution, a modified model for the occurrence of large earthquakes. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1981; 71:2097-2101.
13. Yegulalp TM, Kuo JT. Statistical prediction of the occurrences of maximum magnitude earthquakes. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1974; 64(2):393-414.
14. Gupta ID, Deshpande VC. Application of log-Pearson type-III distribution for evaluation of design earthquake magnitudes. Journal of the Institution of Engineers (India), Civil Division 1995; 75:129-134.
15. Trifunac MD, Brady AG. A study on the duration of strong earthquake ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1975; 65:581-626.
16. Gupta ID, Trifunac MD. Defining equivalent stationary PSDF to account for nonstationarity of earthquake ground motion. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 1998; 17:89-99.
17. Trifunac MD, Lee VW. Preliminary empirical model for scaling Fourier amplitude spectra of strong ground acceleration in terms of earthquake magnitude, source to station distance, site intensity and recording site conditions. Report No. CE 85-03, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, U.S.A., 1985.
18. Trifunac MD, Brady AG. Correlation of peak acceleration, velocity and displacement with earthquake magnitude, distance and site conditions. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1976; 4:455-471.
19. Caughey TK. Random excitation of a system with bilinear hysteresis. Journal of Applied Mechanics (ASME) 1960; 27:649-652.
20. Gupta ID, Trifunac MD. Order statistics of peaks in earthquake response. Journal of Engineering Mechanics (ASCE) 1988; 114(10):1605-1627.
21. Gupta VK. Developments in response spectrum-based stochastic response of structural systems. ISET Journal of Earthquake Technology 2002; 39(4):347-365.
22. Kunnath SK, Reinhorn AM, Lobo RF. IDARC version 3.0: a program for the inelastic damage analysis of RC structures. Report NCEER-92-2002, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New York at Buffalo, New York, U.S.A., 1992.
23. Reinhorn AM, Kunnath SK, Mander JB. Seismic design of structures for damage control. In Nonlinear Seismic Analysis and Design of Reinforced Concrete Buildings, Fajfar P, Krawinkler H (eds). Elsevier Applied Science: London, 1992.
24. Todorovska MI. Comparison of response spectrum amplitudes from earthquakes with a lognormally and exponentially distributed return period. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 1994; 13:97-116.
25. Sykes LR, Nishenko SP. Probabilities of occurrence of large plate rupturing earthquakes for the San Andreas, San Jacinto, and Imperial faults, California, 1983-2003. Journal of Geological Research 1984; 89:5905-5927.