Sensitivity of Seismic Response and Fragility to Parameter Uncertainty of Single-Layer Reticulated Domes
- 106 Downloads
Quantitatively modeling and propagating all sources of uncertainty stand at the core of seismic fragility assessment of structures. This paper investigates the effects of various sources of uncertainty on seismic responses and seismic fragility estimates of single-layer reticulated domes. Sensitivity analyses are performed to examine the sensitivity of typical seismic responses to uncertainties in structural modeling parameters, and the results suggest that the variability in structural damping, yielding strength, steel ultimate strain, dead load and snow load has significant effects on the seismic responses, and these five parameters should be taken as random variables in the seismic fragility assessment. Based on this, fragility estimates and fragility curves incorporating different levels of uncertainty are obtained on the basis of the results of incremental dynamic analyses on the corresponding set of 40 sample models generated by Latin Hypercube Sampling method. The comparisons of these fragility curves illustrate that, the inclusion of only ground motion uncertainty is inappropriate and inadequate, and the appropriate way is incorporating the variability in the five identified structural modeling parameters as well into the seismic fragility assessment of single-layer reticulated domes.
KeywordsSensitivity analysis Seismic fragility curves Structural modeling uncertainties Incremental dynamic analysis Single-layer reticulated domes
This present work has been conducted with the financial support from the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant No. 3102017OQD071), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 51525802 and 51778157). The very constructive comments by the reviewers to this paper are also greatly appreciated.
- FEMA. (1997). NEHRP guidelines for seismic rehabilitation of buildings. FEMA-273, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C., USA.Google Scholar
- Gao, X. W., & Bao, A. B. (1985). Probabilistic model and its statistical parameters for seismic load. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 5(3), 13–22.Google Scholar
- GB50009. (2012). Load code for the design of building structures. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press.Google Scholar
- JCSS. (2001). Probabilistic model code, Part 3: Resistance models, static properties of structural steel (rolled sections). JCSS Zurich. Available from Internet: http://www.jcss.ethz.ch/.
- JGJ7. (2010). Technical specification for space frame structure. Beijing: China Architecture Industry Press.Google Scholar
- Moehle, J. & Deierlein, G. G. (2004). A framework methodology for performance-based earthquake engineering. In Proc. 13th world conf. on earthquake engineering, CD-ROM, Canadian Association for Earthquake Engineering, Canada, pp. 3812–3814.Google Scholar
- Porter, K. A., Beck, J. L. & Shaikhutdinov, R. V. (2002). Investigation of sensitivity of building loss estimates to major uncertain variables for the Van Nuys testbed. PEER technical report, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Richmond, CA, USA.Google Scholar
- Shah, H. C., Bao, A. B., & Dong, W. M. (1982). Implications and application of Bayesian model for seismic hazard analysis. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 2(4), 1–15.Google Scholar
- Wang, D. (2006). Probabilistic risk analysis of steel frame structures (pp. 18–19). Harbin: Dissertation of Harbin Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
- Xie, L. L., & Ma, Y. H. (2002). Studies on performance-based seismic design criterion. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 24(2), 200–209.Google Scholar