Life-cycle seismic loss estimation and global sensitivity analysis based on stochastic ground motion modeling

Engineering Structures

Volumn 54, Issue , 2013, Pages 192-206

  Lamprou, Alexandros ^a   Jia, Gaofeng ^a   Taflanidis, Alexandros A ^a  

^a University of Notre Dame   (United States)

Author keywords

Assembly based vulnerability; Life cycle repair cost; Probabilistic global sensitivity analysis; Seismic losses; Stochastic ground motion models; Stochastic simulation

Indexed keywords

ASSEMBLY-BASED VULNERABILITY; GLOBAL SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; REPAIR COSTS; SEISMIC LOSS; STOCHASTIC GROUND MOTION MODEL; STOCHASTIC SIMULATIONS;

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST ESTIMATING; ESTIMATION; LIFE CYCLE; PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTIONS; REPAIR; SEISMIC DESIGN; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STOCHASTIC MODELS; STOCHASTIC SYSTEMS;

EARTHQUAKES;

EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE; EARTHQUAKE EVENT; EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE; EARTHQUAKE MECHANISM; EARTHQUAKE RUPTURE; GROUND MOTION; LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS; MULTISTOREY BUILDING; NUMERICAL MODEL; PARAMETERIZATION; SEISMIC HAZARD; SEISMIC RESPONSE; SEISMICITY; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS; STRUCTURAL RESPONSE; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; VULNERABILITY;

EID: 84877915528     PISSN: 01410296     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.04.001     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Porter K.A., Kennedy R.P., Bachman R.E. Creating fragility functions for performance-based earthquake engineering. Earthquake Spectra 2007, 23:471-489.
2. Fragiadakis M., Lagaros N.D., Papadrakakis M. Performance-based multiobjective optimum design of steel structures considering life-cycle cost. Struct Multidiscip Optimiz 2006, 32:1-11.
3. Kircher C.A., Whitman R.V., Holmes W.T. Hazus earthquake loss estimation methods. Nat Hazards 2006, 7:45-59.
4. Ang H.-S.A., Lee J.-C. Cost optimal design of R/C buildings. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 2001, 73:233-238.
5. Porter K.A., Kiremidjian A.S., LeGrue J.S. Assembly-based vulnerability of buildings and its use in performance evaluation. Earthquake Spectra 2001, 18:291-312.
6. Goulet C.A., Haselton C.B., Mitrani-Reiser J., Beck J.L., Deierlein G., Porter K.A., et al. Evaluation of the seismic performance of code-conforming reinforced-concrete frame building - from seismic hazard to collapse safety and economic losses. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 2007, 36:1973-1997.
7. Ramirez CM, Miranda E. Building-specific loss estimation methods and tools for simplified performance-based earthquake engineering. San Francisco: Stanford University, Report No 171; 2009.
8. Katsanos E.I., Sextos A.G., Manolis G.D. Selection of earthquake ground motion records: a state-of-the-art review from a structural engineering perspective. Soil Dynam Earthquake Eng 2010, 30:157-169.
9. Baker J.W., Cornell C.A. A vector-valued ground motion intensity measure consisting of spectral acceleration and epsilon. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 2005, 34:1193-1217.
10. Bradley B.A. A generalised conditional intensity measure approach and holistic ground motion selection. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 2010, 39.
11. Bradley B.A., Lee D.S. Component correlations in structure-specific seismic loss estimation. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 2010, 39.
12. Rezaeian S., Der Kiureghian A. Simulation of synthetic ground motions for specified earthquake and site characteristics. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 2010, 39:1155-1180.
13. Taflanidis A.A., Beck J.L. Life-cycle cost optimal design of passive dissipative devices. Struct Saf 2009, 31:508-522.
14. Au S.K., Beck J.L. Subset simulation and its applications to seismic risk based on dynamic analysis. J Eng Mech ASCE 2003, 129:901-917.
15. Taflanidis A.A. Optimal probabilistic design of seismic-dampers for protection of isolated bridges against near-fault seismic excitations. Eng Struct 2011, 33:3496-3508.
16. Grigoriu M. To scale or not to scale seismic ground-acceleration records. J Eng Mech 2011, 137:284-293.
17. Boore D.M. Simulation of ground motion using the stochastic method. Pure Appl Geophys 2003, 160:635-676.
18. Rezaeian S., Der Kiureghian A. A stochastic ground motion model with separable temporal and spectral nonstationatiries. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 2008, 37:1565-1584.
19. Atkinson G.M., Silva W. Stochastic modeling of California ground motions. Bull Seismol Soc Am 2000, 90:255-274.
20. Taflanidis A.A., Jia G. A simulation-based framework for risk assessment and probabilistic sensitivity analysis of base-isolated structures. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 2011, 40:1629-1651.
21. Vetter C., Taflanidis A.A. Global sensitivity analysis for stochastic ground motion modeling in seismic-risk assessment. Soil Dynam Earthquake Eng 2012, 38:128-143.
22. Beck JL. Probability logic, information quantification and robust predictive analysis: Earthquake Engineering Research Laboratory. EERL Report No. 2008-5 California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California; 2008.
23. Der Kiureghian A., Ditlevsen O. Aleatory or epistemic? Does it matter?. Struct Saf 2009, 31:105-112.
24. Jalayer F., Beck J.L. Effects of two alternative representations of ground-motion uncertainty n probabilistic seismic demand assessment of structures. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 2007, 37:61-79.
25. Shinozuka M., Deodatis G. Stochastic process for earthquake ground motion. Probab Eng Mech 1988, 3.
26. Gavin H.P., Dickinson B.W. Generation of uniform-hazard earthquake ground motions. J Struct Eng 2011, 137:423-432.
27. Boore D.M., Joyner W.B. Site amplifications for generic rock sites. Bull Seismol Soc Am 1997, 87:327-341.
28. Robert C.P., Casella G. Monte Carlo statistical methods 2004, Springer, New York (NY). 2nd ed.
29. Taflanidis A.A., Beck J.L. An efficient framework for optimal robust stochastic system design using stochastic simulation. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 2008, 198:88-101.
30. Taflanidis A.A. Stochastic Subset Optimization incorporating moving least squares response surface methodologies for stochastic sampling. Adv Eng Softw 2012, 44:3-14.
31. Taflanidis A.A., Beck J.L. Stochastic Subset Optimization for reliability optimization and sensitivity analysis in system design. Comput Struct 2009, 87:318-331.
32. Jaynes E.T. Probability theory: the logic of science 2003, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (UK).
33. Scott D.W. Multivariate density estimation: theory, practice and visualization 1992, Wiley-Interscience, New York (NY).
34. Jia G., Taflanidis A.A. Non-parametric Stochastic Subset Optimization for optimal-reliability design problems. Comput Struct 2012, 10.1016/j.compstruc.2012.12.009.
35. Jia G, Taflanidis AA. Relative entropy estimation through stochastic sampling and stochastic simulation techniques. In: Second international conference on soft computing technology in civil, structural and environmental engineering. Chania (Greece); 2011.
36. Karunamuni R.J., Zhang S. Some improvements on a boundary corrected kernel density estimator. Stat Probabil Lett 2008, 78:499-507.
37. Haselton CB, Goulet CA, Mitrani-Reiser J, Beck JL, Deierlein GG, Porter KA, et al. An assessment to benchmark the seismic performance of a code-conforming reinforced concrete moment-frame building. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, PEER, Report 2007/12; 2008.
38. International Code Council. International Building Code: Cengage, Learning; 2003.
39. American Society of Civil Engineers. Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. ASCE 7-02 Reston (Virginia): ASCE; 2002.
40. Mazzoni S., MaKebba F., Fenves G.L. OpenSees command language manual 2005, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Center, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley (CA).
41. Kramer S.L. Geotechnical earthquake engineering 2003, Prentince Hall.
42. Porter K.A., Beck J.L., Shaikhutdinov R.V., Au S.K., Mizukoshi K., Miyamura M., et al. Effect of seismic risk on lifetime property values. Earthquake Spectra 2004, 20:1211-1237.
43. Brown P.C., Lowes L.N. Fragility functions for modern reinforced-concrete beam-column joints. Earthquake Spectra 2007, 23:263-289.
44. Robertson I.N., Kawai T., Lee J., Enomoto B. Cyclic testing of slab-column connections with shear reinforcement. ACI Struct J 2002, 99:605-613.
45. Lu Y., Gu X., Guan J. Probabilistic drift limits and performance evaluation of reinforced concrete columns. J Struct Eng 2005, 131:966-978.
46. ATC-58. Guidelines for seismic performance assessment of buildings, ATC-58 50% draft. Redwood City (CA): American Technology Council; 2009.
47. McKenna F. OpenSees: a framework for earthquake engineering simulation. Comput Sci Eng 2011, 13:58-66.
48. Fujimoto RM. Parallel simulation: parallel and distributed simulation systems. In: 33rd Winter simulation conference. Arlington (Virginia); 2001. p. 147-57.