Incremental dynamic analysis with consideration of modeling uncertainties

Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics

Volumn 38, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 805-825

  Dolsek, Matjaz ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

Author keywords

Aleatory; Epistemic; Extended incremental dynamic analysis; Latin hypercube sampling; Performance based earthquake engineering; Uncertainty

Indexed keywords

BUILDING MATERIALS; CIVIL ENGINEERING; DYNAMIC ANALYSIS; EARTHQUAKES; ENGINEERING GEOLOGY; GEOMETRY; MODEL STRUCTURES; OCEAN STRUCTURES; RANDOM VARIABLES; REINFORCED CONCRETE; SEISMIC RESPONSE; TESTING;

ALEATORY; EPISTEMIC; EXTENDED INCREMENTAL DYNAMIC ANALYSIS; LATIN HYPERCUBE SAMPLING; PERFORMANCE-BASED EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING; UNCERTAINTY;

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

DYNAMIC ANALYSIS; EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING; GROUND MOTION; LABORATORY METHOD; MULTISTOREY BUILDING; NUMERICAL MODEL; PARAMETERIZATION; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; REINFORCED CONCRETE; SEISMIC RESPONSE; STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS; STRUCTURAL RESPONSE; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

EID: 68149100760     PISSN: 00988847     EISSN: 10969845     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/eqe.869     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA. Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2002; 31:491-514.
2. Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA. Applied incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Spectra 2004; 10(2):523-553.
3. Zareian F, Krawinkler H. Assessment of probability of collapse and design for collapse safety. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2007; 36:1901-1914.
4. Tagawa H, MacRae G, Lowes L. Probabilistic evaluation of seismic performance of 3-story 3D one- and two-way steel moment-frame structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2008; 37:681-696.
5. Pasticier L, Amadio C, Fragiacomo M. Non-linear seismic analysis and vulnerability evaluation of a masonry building by means of the SAP2000 V.10 code. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2008; 37: 467-485.
6. Baker JW. Probabilistic structural response assessment using vector-valued intensity measures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2007; 36:1861-1883.
7. Tothong P, Luco N. Probabilistic seismic demand analysis using advanced ground motion intensity measures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2007; 36:1837-1860.
8. Jalayer F, Franchin P, Pinto PE. A scalar damage measure for seismic reliability analysis of RC frames. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2007; 36:2059-2079.
9. Vamvatisikos D, Cornell CA. Direct estimation of seismic demand and capacity of multi-degree of freedom systems through incremental dynamic analysis of single degree of freedom approximation. Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE) 2005; 131(4):589-599.
10. Han SW, Chopra AK. Approximate incremental dynamic analysis using the modal pushover analysis procedure. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2006; 35:1853-1873.
11. Dolšek M, Fajfar P. Simplified probabilistic seismic performance assessment of plan-asymmetric buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2007; 36:2021-2041.
12. Azarbakht A, Dolšek M. Prediction of the median IDA curve by employing a limited number of ground motion records. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2007; 36:2401-2421.
13. Solberg KM, Dhakal RP, Mander JB, Bradley BA. Computational and rapid expected annual loss estimation methodologies for structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2008; 37:81-101.
14. Porter KA, Beck JL, Shaikhutdinov RV. Investigation of sensitivity of building loss estimates to major uncertain variables for the Van Nuys testbed, California Institute of Technology. PEER Report 2002/ 2003, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, August 2002.
15. Haselton CB. Assessing seismic collapse safety of modern reinforced concrete moment frame buildings. Ph.D. Dissertation, Stanford University, 2006.
16. Lee T-H, Mosalam KM. Seismic demand sensitivity of reinforced concrete shear-wall building using FOSM method. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2005; 34:1719-1736.
17. Baker JW, Cornell CA. Uncertainty propagation in probabilistic seismic loss estimation. Structural Safety 2008; 30:236-252.
18. Liel A, Haselton C, Deierlein G, Baker J. Assessing the seismic collapse risk of reinforced concrete frame structures, including the effects of modeling uncertainties. Special Workshop on Risk Acceptance and Risk Communication, Stanford University, 26-27 March 2007.
19. Liel AB, Haselton CB, Deierlein GG, Baker JW. Incorporating modeling uncertainties in the assessment of seismic collapse risk of buildings. Structural Safety 2008; DOI: 10.1016/j.strusafe.2008.06.002.
20. Vorechovsky M, Novak D. Statistical correlation in stratified sampling. In ICAPS 9 Proceedings of International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering, Der Kiureghian A, Madant S, Pestana JM (eds). Millpress: Rotterdam, San Francisco, 2003; 119-124.
21. Kala Z. Sensitivity analysis of the stability problems of thin-walled structures. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 2005; 61:415-422.
22. Carvalho EC, Coelho E. Seismic assessment, strengthening and repair of structures. ECOEST2-ICONS Report No. 2, European Commission - 'Training and Mobility of Researchers' Programme, 2001.
23. CEN. Eurocode 2: design of concrete structures - Part 1-1: general rules and rules for buildings. EN 1992-1-1, European Committee for Standardisation, Brussels, December 2004.
24. Fajfar P, Dolšek M, Marušić D, Stratan A. Pre- and post-test mathematical modelling of a plan-asymmetric reinforced concrete frame building. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2006; 35:1359-1379.
25. Peruš I, Poljanšek K, Fajfar P. Flexural deformation capacity of rectangular RC columns determined by the CAE method. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2006; 35:1453-1470.
26. CEN. Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance - Part 3: strengthening and repair of buildings. EN 1998-3, European Committee for Standardisation, Brussels, March 2005.
27. McKenna F, Fenves GL. Open system for earthquake engineering simulation. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA. Available from: http://opensees.berkeley.edu/, 2004.
28. Ellingwood B, Galambos TV, MacGregor JG, Cornell CA. Development of a Probability-based Load Criterion for American National Standard A58. National Bureau of Standards, Washington, DC, 1980; 222.
29. Melchers RE. Structural Reliability Analysis and Prediction. Wiley: New York, 1999.
30. JCSS. Probabilistic Model Code - Part 1: Basis of Design (12th draft). Joint Committee on Structural Safety, March 2001. Available from: http://www.jcss.ethz.ch/.
31. Panagiotakos TB, Fardis MN. Deformations of reinforced concrete at yielding and ultimate. ACI Structural Journal 2001; 98(2):135-147.
32. Ambraseys N, Smith P, Bernardi R, Rinaldis D, Cotton F, Berge-Thierry C. Dissemination of European Strong-Motion Data. CD-ROM collection. European Council, Environment and Climate Research Programme, 2000.
33. Dolšek M, Fajfar P. Inelastic spectra for infilled reinforced concrete frames. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2004; 33(15):1395-1416.
34. Cornell CA, Jalayar 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.
35. Dolšek M, Fajfar P. Simplified probabilistic seismic performance assessment of plan-asymmetric buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2007; 36:2021-2041.
36. Krawinkler H (ed.). Van Nuys hotel building testbed report: excercising seismic performance assessment. PEER Report 05/11, October 2005.
37. Chintanapakdee C, Chopra AK. Seismic response of vertical irregular frames: response history and modal pushover analyses. Journal of Structural Engineering 2004; 130(8):1177-1185.