Fragility assessment of building structural systems in Mid-America

Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics

Volumn 36, Issue 13, 2007, Pages 1935-1952

  Ellingwood, Bruce R ^a   Celik, Ozan Cem ^a   Kinali, Kursat ^a  

^a Georgia Institute of Technology   (United States)

Author keywords

Buildings; Fragility; Reliability; Risk; Seismology; Structural engineering

Indexed keywords

CONCRETE BUILDINGS; EARTHQUAKE RESISTANCE; REINFORCED CONCRETE; RELIABILITY; SEISMIC RESPONSE; SEISMOLOGY; UNITED STATES;

BUILDING STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS; EARTHQUAKE GROUND MOTION; FRAGILITY ASSESSMENT;

SEISMIC DESIGN;

BUILDING; GROUND MOTION; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; RELIABILITY ANALYSIS; SEISMIC RESPONSE; SEISMICITY; SEISMOLOGY; STRONG MOTION; STRUCTURAL RESPONSE;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 35748972929     PISSN: 00988847     EISSN: 10969845     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/eqe.693     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Applied Technology Council. Earthquake damage evaluation data for California. Report ATC-13, Redwood City, CA, 1985.
2. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Multi-hazard loss estimation methodology, Earthquake model. HAZUS-MH MRI Technical Manual, Washington, DC, 2003.
3. Singhal A, Kiremidjian AS. Method for probabilistic evaluation of seismic structural damage. Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE) 1996; 122(12):1459-1467.
4. Shinozuka M, Feng MQ, Lee J, Naganuma T. Statistical analysis of fragility curves. Journal of Engineering Mechanics (ASCE) 2000; 126 (12):1224-1231.
5. Song J, Ellingwood BR. Probabilistic modeling of steel moment frames with welded connections. Engineering Journal (AISC) 1999; 36(3):129-137.
6. Erberik MA, Elnashai AS. Fragility analysis of flat-slab structures. Engineering Structures 2004; 26(7):937-948.
7. Kwon OS, Elnashai A. The effect of material and ground motion uncertainty on the seismic vulnerability curves of RC structure. Engineering Structures 2006; 28(2):289-303.
8. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Recommended Seismic Design Criteria for New Steel Moment-frame Buildings (4FEMA 350). Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, 2000.
9. Cornell CA, Jalayer F, Hamburger RO, Foutch DA. Probabilistic basis for 2000 SAC Federal Emergency Management Agency steel moment frame guidelines. Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE) 2002; 128(4): 526-533.
10. Giovenale P, Cornell CA, Esteva L. Comparing the adequacy of alternative ground motion intensity measures for the estimation of structural responses. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2004; 33(8):951-979.
11. Wen YK, Ellingwood BR, Veneziano D, Bracci J. Uncertainty modeling in earthquake engineering (white paper). Project FD-2 Report, Mid-America Earthquake Center, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, 2003. http://mae.cee.uiuc.edu (31 July 2006).
12. Wen YK, Ellingwood BR. The role of fragility assessment in consequence-based engineering. Earthquake Spectra 2005; 21(3):861-877.
13. Ellingwood B. Issues related to structural aging in probabilistic risk analysis of nuclear power plants. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 1998; 62(3):171-183.
14. French S, Olshansky R. Inventory of essential facilities in Mid-America. Project SE-1 Final Report, Mid-America Earthquake Center, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, 2001. http://mae.cee.uiuc.edu (31 July 2006).
15. Gupta A, Krawinkler H. Behavior of ductile SMRFs at various seismic hazard levels. Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE) 2000; 126(1):98-107.
16. Building Officials and Code Administrators International. National Building Code. Building Officials and Code Administrators International, County Club Hills, IL, 1993.
17. Foutch DA, Yun SY. Modeling of steel moment frames for seismic loads. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 2002; 58:529-564,
18. Federal Emergency Management Agency. State of the Art Report on Systems Performance of Steel Moment Frames Subject to Earthquake Ground Shaking (FEMA-355C). Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, 2000.
19. Barakat M, Chen WF. Design analysis of semi-rigid frames: evaluation and implementation. Engineering Journal (AISC) 1991; Second Quarter:55-64.
20. Kishi N, Chen WE Database of steel beam-to-column connections, vols. I and II. Structural Engineering Report No. CE-STR-86-26, School of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 1986.
21. Hoffmann GW, Kunnath SK, Reinhorn AM, Mander JB. Gravity-load-designed reinforced concrete buildings: seismic evaluation of existing construction and detailing strategies for improved seismic resistance. Technical Report NCEER-92-0016, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, 1992.
22. ACI Committee 319. Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-89) and commentary (ACI 318R-89). American Concrete Institute, Detroit, MI, 1989.
23. Beres A, White RN, Gergely P. Seismic behavior of reinforced concrete frame structures with nonductile details: Part I - summary of experimental findings of full scale beam-column joint tests. Technical Report NCEER-92-0024, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, 1992.
24. Aslani H, Miranda E. Probability-based seismic response analysis. Engineering Structures 2005; 27(8):1151-1163.
25. Park R, Priestley MJN, Gill WD. Ductility of square-confined concrete columns. Journal of the Structural Division (ASCE) 1982; 108(ST4):929-950.
26. Celik OC, Ellingwood BR. Modeling beam-column joints in fragility assessment of gravity load designed reinforced concrete frames. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 2006, in press.
27. Boore DM. Simulation of ground motion using the stochastic method. Pure and Applied Geophysics 2003; 160:635-676.
28. Wen Y& Wu CL. Uniform hazard ground motions for Mid-America cities. Earthquake Spectra 2001; 17(2): 359-384.
29. Atkinson GM, Boore DM. Ground-motion relations for eastern North America. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1995; 85(1):17-30.
30. Frankel AD, Mueller CS, Barnhard TP, Perkins DM, Leyendecker EV, Dickman N, Hanson SL, Hopper MG. National seismic-hazard maps: documentation. Open-File Report 96-532, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO, 1996.
31. Silva W, Gregor N, Darragh R. Development of Regional Hard Rock Attenuation Relations for Central and Eastern North America, Mid-Continent and Gulf Coast Areas. Pacific Engineering and Analysis, El Cerrito, CA, 2003.
32. Fernandez JA, Rix GJ. Soil attenuation relationships and seismic hazard analyses in the Upper Mississippi Embayment. Proceedings of the Eighth U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, San Francisco, CA, 18-22 April 2006.
33. Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA. Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2002; 31(3):491-514,
34. Federal Emergency Management Agency. NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings (FEMA 273/356). Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, 1997/2000.
35. Kinali K, Ellingwood BR. Seismic fragility assessment of steel frames for consequence-based engineering: a case study for Memphis, TN. Engineering Structures 2006, in press. DOI: 10.1016/ j.engstruct.2006.08.017
36. Erberik MA, Elnashai AS. Seismic vulnerability of flat-slab structures. Project DS-9 Technical Report, Mid-America Earthquake Center, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, 2003. http://mae.cee.uiuc.edu (31 July 2006).
37. Freeman SA. The capacity spectrum method as a tool for seismic design. Proceedings of the Eleventh European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paris, France, 6-11 September 1998.
38. Erberik MA, Elnashai AS. Loss estimation analysis of flat-slab structures. Natural Hazards Review (ASCE) 2006; 7(1):26-37.