Risk-based seismic evaluation of reinforced concrete buildings

Earthquake Spectra

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 795-821

  Tesfamariam, Solomon ^a   Saatcioglu, Murat ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CODES (SYMBOLS); CONCRETE BUILDINGS; CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION; EARTHQUAKES; FUZZY INFERENCE; FUZZY RULES; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS; RETROFITTING; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEISMIC DESIGN; STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS;

BUILDING VULNERABILITIES; CODES OF PRACTICE; HIERARCHICAL STRUCTURES; NORTHRIDGE EARTHQUAKES; RISK-BASED EVALUATION; SEISMIC ASSESSMENT; SEISMIC EVALUATION; SEISMIC HAZARDS;

REINFORCED CONCRETE;

BUILDING CODE; EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEM; REINFORCED CONCRETE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEISMIC DESIGN; SEISMIC HAZARD; VULNERABILITY;

EID: 51049091434     PISSN: 87552930     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1193/1.2952767     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. AIJ, 1995. Preliminary report on the great Hanshin Earthquake, January 17, 1995. English Edition, Japan Society of Civil Engineers, Tokyo.
2. Alim, S., and Smith, D. L., 1989. Fuzzy set-theoretic models for interpretation of seismic design codes, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 29, 277-291.
3. Arnold, C., and Reitherman, R., 1982. Building Configuration and Seismic Design. A Wiley-Interscience Publications, Toronto.
4. ATC, 1985. Earthquake Damage Evaluation Data for California. Applied Technology Council, ATC-13 Report, Redwood City, California.
5. ATC, 2001. Database on the Performance of Structures Near Strong-Motion Recordings: 1994 Northridge, California, Earthquake. Applied Technology Council, ATC-38 Report, Redwood City, California.
6. ATC, 2002. Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings for Potential Seismic Hazard: A Handbook. (Second edition), prepared by the Applied Technology Council, published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, (FEMA 154 report), Washington, D.C.
7. Bird, J. E, and Bommer, J. J., 2004. Earthquake losses due to ground failure, Engineering Geology 75, 147-179.
8. Boissonnade, A. C., and Shah, H. C., 1985. Use of Patter Recognition and Fuzzy Sets in Seismic Risk Analysis. Report 67, Stanford, California: John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center.
9. BSSC, 2003. NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures, Part 1: Provisions (FEMA 450-1/2003 Edition). Building Seismic Safety Council, Washington, D.C.
10. CAEE, 2005. Reconnaissance report on the December 26, 2004 Sumatra Earthquake and tsunami. The Canadian Association for Earthquake Engineering.
11. Carreño, M. L., Cardona, O. D., and Barbat, A. H., 2004. New techniques applied to post-earthquake assessment of buildings, Article No. 9, Intersection/Intersectii 1, 12-22.
12. Chongfu, H., 1996. Fuzzy risk assessment of urban natural hazards, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 83, 271-282.
13. Demartinos, K., and Dritsos, S., 2006. First-level pre-earthquake assessment of buildings using fuzzy logic, Earthquake Spectra 22, 865-885.
14. Dey, P. J., 2001. Societal perspectives about earthquake performance: the fallacy of "acceptable risk," Earthquake Spectra 17, 725-737.
15. Dey, P. J., 2004. Making choices about earthquake performance, Nat. Hazards Rev. 5, 64-70.
16. Dogangün, A., 2004. Performance of reinforced concrete buildings during the May 1, 2003 Bingöl earthquake in Turkey, Eng. Struct. 26, 841-856.
17. Dolce, M., Kappos, A., Masi, A., Penelis, G., and Vona, M., 2006. Vulnerability assessment and earthquake damage scenarios of the building stock of Potenza (Southern Italy) using Italian and Greek methodologies, Eng. Struct. 28, 357-371.
18. Dong, W, Chiang, W. L., and Shah, H. C., 1987. Fuzzy information processing in seismic hazard analysis and decision making, Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 6, 220-226.
19. EERI Committee on Seismic Risk, 1989. The basics of seismic risk analysis, Earthquake Spectra 5, 675-702.
20. EERI, 1983. El-Asnam, Algeria Earthquake, October 10, 1980; A Reconnaissance and Engineering Report. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, California.
21. EERI, 1989. Loma Prieta Earthquake, October 17, 1989; Preliminary Reconnaissance Report. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, California.
22. EERI, 1994. Northridge Earthquake, January 17, 1994; Preliminary Reconnaissance Report. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, California.
23. EERI, 1995. The Hyogoken-Nanbu Earthquake: Great Hanshin Earthquake Disaster January 17, 1995; Preliminary Reconnaissance Report. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, California.
24. Elms, D. G., 2004. Structural safety issues and progress, Prog. Struct. Eng. Mater. 6, 116-126.
25. FEMA-249, 1994. Assessment of the State-of-the-Art Earthquake Loss Estimation Methodologies.
26. Flynn, J., Slovic, R, Mertz, C. K., and Carlisle, C., 1999. Public support for earthquake risk mitigation in Portland, Oregon, Risk Anal. 19, 205-216.
27. Furuta, H., and Nomura, Y., 2003. Time series prediction of earthquake input by using soft computing. Fourth International Symposium on Uncertainty Modeling and Analysis, College Park, MD, 351-356.
28. Ghobarah, A., 2000. Seismic assessment of existing RC structures, Prog. Struct. Eng. Mater. 2, 60-71.
29. Ghobarah, A., Saatcioglu, M., and Nistor, I., 2006. The impact of the 26 December 2004 earthquake and tsunami on structures and infrastructure, Eng. Struct. 28, 312-326.
30. Hadipriono, E C., and Ross, T. J., 1991. A rule-based fuzzy logic deduction technique for damage assessment of protective structures, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 44, 459-468.
31. Hopkins, D. C., 1993. The Philippines earthquake of July 1990-Lessons for us all from the destruction and reconstruction. Proceedings of the Tom Paulay Symposium, SP157-21, September 20-22, La Jolla, California: 465-486.
32. Huang, C., and Moraga, C., 2002. A fuzzy risk model and its matrix algorithm, Int. J. Uncertainty, Fuzziness Knowledge-Based Syst. 10, 347-362.
33. Humar, J. M., Lau, D., and Pierre, J., 2001. Performance of buildings during the 2001 Bhuj earthquake, Can. J. Civ. Eng. 28, 979-991.
34. Karakostas, C., Lekidis, V, Makarios, T, Salonikios, T., Sous, I., and Demosthenous, M., 2005. Seismic response of structures and infrastructure facilities during the Lefkada, Greece earthquake of 14/8/ 2003, Eng. Struct. 27, 213-227.
35. Karimi, I., and Hüllermeier, E., 2007. Risk assessment system of natural hazards: A new approach based on fuzzy probability, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 158, 987-999.
36. Klir, G. J., and Yuan, B., 1995. Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic: Theory and Applications. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall International.
37. Klose, C. D., 2002. Fuzzy rule-based expert system for short-range seismic prediction, Comput. Geosci. 28, 377-386.
38. Liou, Y.-T., and Lo, S.-L., 2005. A fuzzy index model for trophic status evaluation of reservoir waters, Water Res. 39, 1415-1423.
39. Mamdani, E. H., 1977. Application of fuzzy logic to approximate reasoning using linguistic synthesis, IEEE Trans. Comput. 26, 1182-1191.
40. Mistakidis, E. S., and Georgiou, D. N., 2003. Fuzzy sets in seismic inelastic analysis and design of reinforced concrete frames, Adv. Eng. Software 34, 589-599.
41. Mitchell, D., De Vall, R., Saatcioglu, M., Simpson, R., Tinawi, R., and Tremblay, R., 1995. Damage to concrete structures due to the 1994 Northridge earthquake, Can. J Civ. Eng. 22, 361-377.
42. Miyasato, G. H., Dong, W, Levitt, R. E., and Boissormade, A. C., 1986. Implementation of a knowledge based seismic risk evaluation system on microcomputers, Artif. Intell. 1, 29-35.
43. Naeim, F, Lew, M., Huang, S. C., Lam, H. K., and Carpenter, L. D., 2000. The performance of tall buildings during the 21 September 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake, Taiwan, Struct. Des. Tall Build. 9, 137-160.
44. Nakashima, M., Fujiwara, T., Suzuki, Y., Bruneau, M., Iwai, S., and Kitahara, A., 1995. Damage to engineered buildings from the 1995 Hyogoken-Nambu earthquake, J. Nat. Disaster Sci. 16, 71-78.
45. NIBS, 1999. Earthquake Loss Estimation Methodology Technical Manual, HAZUS99 Service Release 2 (SR2). Developed by the National Institute of Building Sciences for the Federal Emergency Management Agency Washington, D.C.
46. Popov, E. R, 1987. Observations on the Mexico earthquake of 19 September 1985, Eng. Struct. 9, 74-83.
47. Porter, K. A., Kiremidjian, A. S., and LeGrue, J. S., 2001. Assembly-based vulnerability of buildings and its use in performance evaluation, Earthquake Spectra 17, 291-321.
48. Ricci, P. E, Sagen, L. A., and Whipple, C. G., 1981. Technological Risk Assessment Series E: Applied Series No.81, NATO ASI Series, Erice, Italy.
49. Saatcioglu, M., and Bruneau, M., 1993. Performance of structures during the 1992 Erzincan earthquake, Can. J. Civ. Eng. 20, 305-325.
50. Saatcioglu, M., and Humar, J., 2003. Dynamic analysis of buildings for earthquake-resistant design, Can. J. Civ. Eng. 30, 338-359.
51. Saatcioglu, M., Mitchell, D., Tinawi, R., Gardner, N. J., Gillies, A. G., Ghobarah, A., Anderson, D. L., and Lau, D., 2001. The August 17, 1999, Kocaeli (Turkey) earthquake damage to structures, Can. J. Civ. Eng. 30, 715-737.
52. Sadiq, R., Husain, T., Veitch, B., and Bose, N., 2004. Risk-based decision-making for drilling waste discharges using a fuzzy synthetic evaluation technique, Ocean Eng. 31, 1929-1953.
53. Sánchez-Silva, M., and García, L., 2001. Earthquake damage assessment based on fuzzy logic and neural network, Earthquake Spectra 17, 89-112.
54. Shah, H. C., Dong, W M., and Shah, H. H., 1990. Seismic risk analysis an insurance and investment risk analysis system. Earthquake Damage Evaluation and Vulnerability Analysis of Building Structures (ed, A. Koridez), Omega Scientific, 181-199.
55. Souflis, C., and Grivas, D. A., 1986. Fuzzy set approach to linguistic seismic load and damage assessments, J. Eng. Mech. 112, 605-618.
56. Su, N., 2001. Structural evaluation of reinforced concrete buildings damaged by Chi-Chi earthquake in Taiwan, Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr. 6, 119-128.
57. Tsai, K. C., Hsiao, C. R, and Bruneau, M., 2000. Overview of building damages in 921 Chi-Chi Earthquake, Earthquake Eng. Eng. Seismology 2, 93-108.
58. Whittaker, A., Bertero, V. V, Wight, J., Higashino, M., et al., 1995. Kobe Japan Earthquake January 17, 1995: earthquake damage distribution. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.
59. Yager, R. R., and Filev, D. P., 1994. Generation of fuzzy rules by mountain clustering, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 2, 209-219.
60. Zadeh, L. A., 1965. Fuzzy sets, Information Control 8, 338-353.
61. Zadeh, L. A., 1973. Outline of a new approach to the analysis of complex systems and decision processes, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 3, 28-44.
62. Zadeh, L. A., 1994. Fuzzy logic, neural networks, and soft computing, Electromagn. Phenom. 37, 77-84.