Influence of structural capacity uncertainty on seismic reliability of buildings under narrow-band motions

Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics

Volumn 36, Issue 13, 2007, Pages 1915-1934

  Montiel, M A ^a   Ruiz, S E ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO   (Mexico)

Author keywords

Failure intensity; Narrow band motions; Structural 'softening'; Structural reliability; Uncertainty in structural capacity

Indexed keywords

CONCRETE BUILDINGS; FAILURE ANALYSIS; REINFORCED CONCRETE; RELIABILITY; SEISMIC DESIGN;

FAILURE INTENSITY; NARROW-BAND MOTIONS; STRUCTURAL CAPACITY; STRUCTURAL RELIABILITY;

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS;

BUILDING; DYNAMIC ANALYSIS; FAILURE ANALYSIS; GROUND MOTION; RELIABILITY ANALYSIS; STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 35748973235     PISSN: 00988847     EISSN: 10969845     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/eqe.711     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Cornell CA. Reliability-based earthquake-resistant design: the future. Eleventh World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Acapulco, Mexico, June 1996; Paper no. 2166.
2. Wen YK. Building reliability and code calibration. Earthquake Spectra 1995; 11:269-296.
3. SAC Joint Venture for the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Recommended seismic evaluation and upgrade criteria for existing welded steel moment-frame buildings. FEMA-351. SAC Joint Venture for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, 2000.
4. Gaceta Oficial. Mexico City Design Regulations. January 2004.
5. Montiel MA. Confiabilidad Implícita en Estructuras Convencionales como Base para Establecer Criterios para el Diseño Sismico de Estructuras Reforzadas con Disipadores de Energia. Ph.D. Thesis, Graduate School of Engineering, National University of Mexico, 2006 (in Spanish).
6. Kent DC, Park R. Flexural members with confined concrete. Journal of Structural Division (ASCE) 1971; 97(7):1969-1990.
7. Park R, Priestley MJN, Gill WD. Ductility of square confined concrete columns. Journal of Structural Division (ASCE) 1982; 108(4):929-950.
8. Mander J. Seismic design of bridge piers. Report 84-2, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Cantenbury, New Zealand, 1984.
9. Alamilla JL. Personal communication, 2004.
10. Shome N, Cornell CA. Probabilistic seismic demand analysis of nonlinear structures. Report Mo. RMS-35, Department of Civil Engineering, Stanford University, 1999.
11. Esteva L, Bases para la formulación de decisiones de diseño sismico. Ph.D. Thesis, Graduate School of Engineering, National University of Mexico, 1968 (in Spanish).
12. Cornell CA. Engineering seismic risk analysis. Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 1968; 58(5):1583-1606.
13. Cornell CA, Jalayer F, Hamburger RO, Foutch DA. The probabilistic basis for the 2000 SAC/FEMA steel moment frame guidelines. Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE) 2002; 128(4).
14. Mendoza CJ. Propiedades Mecánicas de los Concretos Fabricados en el Distrito Federal. Research Report, Institute of Engineering, UNAM, 1983 (in Spanish).
15. Rodríguez M, Botero JC. Aspectos del Comportarniento Sísmico de Estructuras Considerando las Propiedades Mecánicas del Acero Producido en México. Research Report, Institute of Engineering, UNAM, Mexico, 1994 (in Spanish).
16. Ruiz SE, Soriano A. Design live loads for office buildings in Mexico and the United States. Journal of Structural Engineering 1997; 123(6):816-822.
17. Mirza A, McGregor J. Variability of mechanical properties of reinforcing bars. Journal of the Structural Division (ASCE), 1979; 105(ST5):921-937.
18. Peir J, Cornell CA. Spatial, temporal variability of live loads. Journal of the Structural Division (ASCE) 1973 5:903-922.
19. Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA. Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2002; 31:491-514.
20. Baker JW, Cornell CA. A vector valued ground motion intensity measure consisting of spectral acceleration and epsilon. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2005; 34:1193-1217.
21. Wen YK, Foutch DA. Proposed statistical and reliability framework for comparing and evaluating predictive models for evaluation and design, and critical issues in developing such framework. Report No. SACIBD-97103, 1997.
22. Krawinkler H, Seneviratna GDPK. Pros and cons of a pushover analysis of seismic performance evaluation. Engineering Structures 1998 20(4-6):452-464.
23. Campos D, Esteva L. Modelo de Comportarniento Histerético y de Daño para Vigas de Concreto Reforzado. XI CongresoNacional de Ingeniería Sismica, Veracruz, Mexico, 1997 (in Spanish).
24. Wen YK, Ellingwood BR, Bracci J. Vulnerability function framework for consequence-based engineering. MAE Center Project DS-4 Report, April 2004.
25. Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA. The incremental dynamic analysis and its application to performance-based earthquake engineering. Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, London, U.K., 2002; Paper no. 479.