Abstract
This study investigates the suitability of various intensity measures for conducting probabilistic seismic risk assessment of low- to mid-rise non-ductile reinforced concrete buildings with various plan configurations located in low-to-moderate seismic regions. Probabilistic seismic demand models are developed by conducting three-dimensional nonlinear time history analyses. The building response is defined to be dependent on component response and interstorey drift limits. In total the suitability of eleven intensity measures is evaluated by examining five criteria: efficiency, practicality, proficiency, sufficiency, and hazard computability. Based on the first four criteria it is identified that peak ground velocity, peak ground displacement, and maximum spectral displacement response are the most suitable intensity measures. Hazard computability is then utilised to select the optimum intensity measure for a hazard model in accordance with the Australian standards.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE/SEI) (2006) Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings (ASCE/SEI 41-06). Americal Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia
Amirsardari A (2018) Seismic assessment of reinforced concrete buildings in Australia including the response of gravity frames. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne
Amirsardari A, Goldsworthy HM, Lumantarna E (2017) Seismic site response analysis leading to revised design response spectra for Australia. J Earthq Eng 21:861–890. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2016.1210058
Au SK, Beck JL (2003) Subset simulation and its application to seismic risk based on dynamic analysis. J Eng Mech (ASCE) 129:901–917. https://doi.org/10.1061//ASCE/0733-9399/2003/129:8/901
Baker JW, Cornell CA (2005) A vector-valued ground motion intensity measure consisting of spectral acceleration and epsilon. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 34:1193–1217. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.474
Baker JW, Cornell CA (2006) Vector-valued ground motion intensity measures for probabilistic seismic demand analysis. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER), University of California, Berkeley
Baker JW, Cornell CA (2008) Vector-valued Intensity measures incorporating spectral shape for prediction of structural response. J Earthq Eng 12:534–554. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460701673076
Bojórquez E, Chávez R, Reyes-Salazar A, Ruiz SE, Bojórquez J (2017) A new ground motion intensity measure IB. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 99:97–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.05.011
Brown A, Gibson G (2004) A multi-tiered earthquake hazard model for Australia. Tectonophysics 390:25–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2004.03.019
Celik OC (2007) Probabilistic assessment of non-ductile reinforced concrete frames susceptible to mid-America ground motions. Georgia Institute of Technology
Cornell CA, Jalayer F, Hamburger RO, Foutch DA (2000) Probabilistic basis for 2000 SAC Federal Emergency Management Agency steel moment frame guidelines. J Struct Eng 128:526–533. https://doi.org/10.1061//ASCE/0733-9445/2002/128:4/526
Deierlein GC, Krawinkler H, Cornell CA (2003) A framework for performance-based earthquake engineering. Paper presented at the 2003 Pacific conference on earthquake engineering
Devore J (2012) Probability and statitostics for engineering and the sciences, 8th edn. Brooks/Cole, Cangaeg Learning, Boston
Ebrahimian H, Jalayer F, Lucchini A, Mollaioli F, Dominicis RD (2014) Case studies on relative sufficiency of alternative intensity measures of ground shaking. In: Second European conference on earthquake engineeirng and seismology, Istanbul, Turkey
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2000) Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rahbilitation of buildings, FEMA-356. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
Giovenale P, Cornell CA, Esteva L (2004) Comparing the adequacy of alternative ground motion intensity measures for the estimation of structural responses. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 33:951–979. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.386
Goldsworthy HM (2012) Lessons from the 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake Australian. J Struct Eng 13:15–20. https://doi.org/10.7158/s11-136.2012.13.2
Goldsworthy HM, Gibson G (2012) Changes in seismic design philosophy for RC structures in areas of low to moderate seismicity following the Christchurch earthquake. In: 15th World Coference on earthquake engineering, Lisbon, Portugal
Hashash YMA, Musgrove MI, Harmon JA, Groholski DR, Phillips CA, Park D (2016) DEEPSOIL 6.1
Henry RS (2013) Assessment of the minimum vertical reinforcement limits for RC walls. In: New Zealand Society earthquake engineering (NZSEE) conference, Auckland, New Zealand
Hoult RD (2017) Seismic assessment of reinforced concrete walls in Australia. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne
Hoult R, Goldsworthy H, Lumantarna E (2017) Plastic hinge length for lightly reinforced rectangular concrete walls J Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2017.1286619
Hoult R, Goldsworthy H, Lumantarna E (2018) Plastic hinge length for lightly reinforced C-shaped concrete walls J Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2018.1453419
Internet Site for European Strong-motion Database (2014) http://www.isesd.hi.is/esd_local/Database/Database.htm
Jalayer F, Franchin P, Pinto PE (2007) A scalar damage measure for seismic reliability analysis of RC frames. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 36:2059–2079. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.704
Jankovic S, Stojadinovic B (2004) Probabilistic performance-based seismic demand model for R/C frame buildings. In: 13th World conference on earthquake engineering (WCEE) Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Lam NTK (1999) “GENQKE” user’s guide: program for generating synthetic earthquake accelerograms based on stochastic simulations of seismological models. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Australia
Lu X, Lu X, Guan H, Ye L (2013) Comparison and selection of ground motion intensity measures for seismic design of super high-rise buildings. Adv Struct Eng 16:1249–1262. https://doi.org/10.1260/1369-4332.16.7.1249
Lucchini A, Mollaioli F, Monti G (2011) Intensity measures for response prediction of a torsional building subjected to bi-directional earthquake ground motion. Bull Earthq Eng 9:1499–1518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-011-9258-2
Luco N, Cornell CA (2007) Structure-specific scalar intensity measures for near-source and ordinary earthquake ground motions. Earthq Spectra 23:357–392. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2723158
McKenna F, Fenves GL, Scott MN, Jeremic B (2013) Open system for earthquake engineering simulation (OpenSEES), 2.4.5, 2013edn edn. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA
Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Ground Motion Database (2014) http://peer.berkeley.edu/peer_ground_motion_database
Padgett JE, Nielson BG, DesRoches R (2008) Selection of optimal intensity measures in probabilistic seismic demand models of highway bridge portfolios. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 37:711–725. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.782
Pampanin S, Kam WK, Tasligedik AS, Gallo PQ, Akguzel U (2011) Considerations of the seismic performance of pre-1970s RC buildings in the Christchurch CBD during the 4th Sept 2010 Canterbury earthquake: was that really a big one?. In: Ninth Pacific conference on earthquake engineering (PCEE): building an earthquake-resilient society, Auckland, New Zealand
Rajeev P, Franchin P, Pinto PE (2008) Increased accuracy of vector-IM-based seismic risk assessment? J Earthq Eng 12:111–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460801925798
Shome N (1999) Probabilistic seismic demand analysis of nonlinear structures. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Standford University, Standford
Shome N, Cornell CA (2000) Structural seismic demand analysis: consideration of collapse. In: 8th ASCE speciality conference on probabilistic mechanics and structural reliability. University of Notre Dame, South Bend, Indiana
Standards Australia (1983) Minimum design loads on structures—wind loads. Standards Association of Australia, Sydney, NSW
Standards Australia (2007) AS 1170.4-2007: Structural design actions, Part 4: earthquake actions in Australia. SAI Global, Sydney, NSW
Standards Australia (1988) AS 3600-1988: concrete structures. Standards Association of Australia, Sydney, NSW
Standards Australia and Standards New Zealand (2002) AS/NZS 1170.0-2002: structural design actions, Part 0: General principles. SAI Global and Standards New Zealand, Syndey, NSW, and Wellington
Theophilou A-AI, Chryssanthopoulos MK, Kappos AJ (2017) A vector-valued ground motion intensity measure incorporating normalized spectral area. Bull Earthq Eng 15:249–270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-016-9959-7
Travasarou T, Bray JD (2003) Optimal ground motion intensity measures for assessment of seismic slope displacements. In: 7th Pacific conference on earthquake engineering, Christchurch, New Zealand
Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA (2002) Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 31:491–514. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.141
Acknowledgements
The support of the Commonwealth of Australia through the Cooperative Research Centre program is acknowledged.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Amirsardari, A., Rajeev, P., Lumantarna, E. et al. Suitable intensity measure for probabilistic seismic risk assessment of non-ductile Australian reinforced concrete buildings. Bull Earthquake Eng 17, 3753–3775 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00632-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00632-1