Closed-form aftershock reliability of damage-cumulating elastic-perfectly-plastic systems

Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics

Volumn 43, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 613-625

  Iervolino, Iunio ^a   Giorgio, Massimiliano ^b   Chioccarelli, Eugenio ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES FEDERICO II   (Italy)

^b SECOND UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES   (Italy)

Author keywords

Cumulative damage process; Energy based damage indices; Gamma distributed increments; Performance based earthquake engineering; Time variant risk

Indexed keywords

EARTHQUAKE EFFECTS; RANDOM PROCESSES; RISK MANAGEMENT;

CUMULATIVE DAMAGE; DAMAGE INDEX; GAMMA-DISTRIBUTED; PERFORMANCE-BASED EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING; TIME VARIANT;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

AFTERSHOCK; ELASTOPLASTICITY; FAILURE MECHANISM; NUMERICAL MODEL; POWER LAW; RELIABILITY ANALYSIS; SEISMIC HAZARD; SEISMIC RESPONSE; SEISMICITY; STOCHASTICITY;

EID: 84896704684     PISSN: 00988847     EISSN: 10969845     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/eqe.2363     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Yeo GL, Cornell CA. A probabilistic framework for quantification of aftershock ground-motion hazard in California: methodology and parametric study. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2009; 38(1): 45-60.
2. Yeo GL, Cornell CA. Post-quake decision analysis using dynamic programming. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2009; 38(1):79-93.
3. Yeo GL, Cornell CA. Stochastic characterization and decision bases under time-dependent aftershock risk in performance-based earthquake engineering, PEER Report 2005/13, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA, 2005.
4. McGuire RK. Seismic Hazard and Risk Analysis, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, MNO-10: Oakland, CA, 2004.
5. Cosenza E, Manfredi G. Damage indices and damage measures. Progress in Structural Engineering and Materials 2000; 2(1):50-59.
6. Park Y, Ang A. Mechanistic seismic damage model for reinforced concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering 1985; 111(4):722-739.
7. Iervolino I, Manfredi G, Cosenza E. Ground motion duration effects on nonlinear seismic response. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2006; 35(1):21-38.
8. th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, 2012. Paper No. 2893.
9. Oehlert GW. A note on the delta method. The American Statistician 1992; 46(1):27-29.
10. Utsu T. Aftershocks and earthquake statistics (1): some parameters which characterize an aftershock sequence and their interrelations. Journal of the Faculty of Science, Hokkaido University, Series 7, Geophysics 1970; 3(3):129-195.
11. Chioccarelli E, Iervolino I. Near-source seismic demand and pulse-like records: a discussion for L'Aquila earthquake. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2010; 39(9):1039-1062.
12. Iervolino I, Chioccarelli E, Convertito V. Engineering design earthquakes from multimodal hazard disaggregation. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 2011; 31(9):1212-1231.
13. Iervolino I, Galasso C, Cosenza E. REXEL: computer aided record selection for code-based seismic structural analysis. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 2010; 8(2):339-362.
14. Goda K, Taylor CA. Effects of aftershocks on peak ductility demand due to strong ground motion records from shallow crustal earthquakes. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2012;41(15): 2311-2330.
15. Shome N, Cornell CA, Bazzurro P, Carballo JE. Earthquakes, records, and nonlinear responses. Earthquake Spectra 1998; 14(3):469-500.
16. Iervolino I, Cornell CA. Record selection for nonlinear seismic analysis of structures. Earthquake Spectra 2005; 21(3):685-713.
17. Luco N, Cornell CA. Structure-specific scalar intensity measures for near-source and ordinary earthquake ground motions. Earthquake Spectra 2007;23(2):357-392.
18. Iervolino I, Giorgio M, Galasso C, Manfredi G. Conditional hazard maps for secondary intensity measures. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 2010; 100(6):3312-3319.
19. Baker JW. Probabilistic structural response assessment using vector-valued intensity measures. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 2007; 36(13):1861-1883.
20. Lolli B, Gasperini P. Aftershocks hazard in Italy Part I: Estimation of time-magnitude distribution model parameters and computation of probabilities of occurrence. Journal of Seismology 2003; 7(2):235-257.
21. th Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zeal& 2011.
22. Zhai C-H, Wen W-P, Chen Z, Li S, Xie L-L. Damage spectra for the mainshock-aftershock sequence-type ground motions. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 2013; 45:1-12.
23. Luco N, Cornell CA, Yeo GL. Annual limit-state frequencies for partially-inspected earthquake-damaged buildings. Structural Safety 2002; 24(2-4):281-296.
24. Giorgio M, Guida M, Pulcini G. An age- and state-dependent Markov model for degradation processes. IIE Transactions 2011; 43(9):621-632.
25. Giorgio M, Guida M, Pulcini G. A state-dependent wear model with an application to marine engine cylinder liners. Technometrics 2010; 52(2):172-187.
26. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Report FEMA 356. Washington DC, US, 2000.
27. Chioccarelli E, Iervolino I. In impact of repeated events with various intensities on the fragility functions for a given building typology at local scale. D4.1 of the MATRIX project, 2012. (URL http://matrix.gpi.kit.edu/).