Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Seismic Fragility Assessment for Buildings due to Earthquake Excitation pp 3–30Cite as

Fragility Curves

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 1779 Accesses

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology ((BRIEFSCOMPUTAT))

Abstract

In these book, fragility curves are defined as the probability of reaching or exceeding a specific damage state under earthquake excitation. The fragility curves are established to provide a prediction of potential damage during an earthquake. The fragility function is also directly used to reduce damage cost and loss of life during a seismic event. Therefore, fragility curves can be used as a decision-making tool for both pre- and post-earthquake situations. Moreover, these curves may help develop future local code provisions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aiswarya, S., and N. Mohan. 2014. Vulnerability analysis by the Development of Fragility Curves. IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, 33–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akhavan, N., Sh. Tavousi Tafreshi, and A. Ghasemi. 2016. Fragility Assessment for vertically Irregular Buildings with Soft Storey. International Journal of Civil, Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural Engineering, at Barcelona, Spain 10 (10): 1274–1282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akkar, S., H. Sucuoğlu, and A. Yakut. 2005. Displacement-based fragility functions for low-and mid-rise ordinary concrete buildings. Earthquake Spectra 21 (4): 901–927. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2084232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alessandri, S., R. Giannini, and F. Paolacci. 2011. A New Method for Probabilistic Aftershock Risk Evaluation of Damaged Bridge. In COMPDYN 2011-III ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ay, B. Ö., and S. Akkar. 2014. Evaluation of a Recently Proposed Record Selection and Scaling Procedure for Low‐Rise to Mid‐Rise Reinforced Concrete Buildings and Its Use for Probabilistic Risk Assessment Studies. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 43: 889–908. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2378.

  • Baker, J.W., T. Lin, and C.B. Haselton. 2014. Ground Motion Selection for Performance-Based Engineering: Effect of Target Spectrum and Conditioning Period. Performance-based Seismic Engineering: Vision for an Earthquake Resilient Society 32: 423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakhshi, A., and P. Asadi. 2013. Probabilistic Evaluation of Seismic Design Parameters of Rc Frames Based on Fragility Curves. Scientia Iranica 20: 231–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scient.2012.11.012.

  • Banihashemi, A.R., and M.H.R. Tavakoli. 2015. Performance-based plastic design method for steel concentric braced frames. International Journal of Advanced Structural Engineering (IJASE) 7 (3): 281–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40091-015-0099-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbat, A. H., H. Alejandro, Y.F. Vargas, L.G. Pujades, and J.E. Hurtado. 2012. Probabilistic assessment of the seismic damage in reinforced concrete buildings. A: International symposium computational civil engineering. In Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium Computational Civil Engineering, Iasi, Romania, May 25th, 2012. Iasi, Societatea Academica, 2012, 43–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billah, A., and M. Alam. 2014. Seismic Fragility Assessment of Highway Bridges: A State-of-the-Art Review. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2014.912243.

  • Charalambos, G., V. Dimitrios, and C. Symeon. 2014. Damage Assessment, Cost Estimating, and Scheduling for Post-Earthquake Building Rehabilitation Using BIM. Computing in Civil and Building Engineering (2014). ASCE, 398–405. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784413616.050#sthash.LO9sx4WX.dpuf.

  • Colapietro, D., A. Netti, A. Fiore, F. Fatiguso, and G.C. Marano. 2014. On the Definition of Seismic Recovery Interventions in Rc Buildings by Non-Linear Static and Incremental Dynamic Analyses. International Journal of Mechanics 8: 216–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunha, A., E. Caetano, P. Ribeiro, and G. Müller. 2014. Earthquake Risk Analysis of Structures. In 9th International Conference on Structural Dynamic, EURODYN 2014, Porto, Portugal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutfield, M., K. Ryan, and Q. Ma. 2016. Comparative life cycle analysis of conventional and base-isolated buildings. Earthquake Spectra 32 (1): 323–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahimian, H., F. Jalayer, D. Asprone, A.M. Lombardi, W. Marzocchi, A. Prota, and G. Manfredi. 2014. A Performance-Based Framework for Adaptive Seismic Aftershock Risk Assessment. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 43: 2179–2197. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farsangi, E.N., F.H. Rezvani, M. Talebi, and S.A. Hashemi. 2014. Seismic Risk Analysis of Steel-MRFs by Means of Fragility Curves in High Seismic Zones. Advances in Structural Engineering 17 (9): 1227–1240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frankie, T.M., B. Gencturk, and A.S. Elnashai. 2012. Simulation-based fragility relationships for unreinforced masonry buildings. Journal of Structural Engineering 139 (3): 400–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, H.A. 2014. Modal pushover analysis for seismic vulnerability analysis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goda, K., and M.R. Salami. 2014. Inelastic Seismic Demand Estimation of Wood-Frame Houses Subjected to Mainshock-Aftershock Sequences. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 12: 855–874. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-013-9534-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancilar, U., E. Çaktı, M. Erdik, G.E. Franco, and G. Deodatis. 2014. Earthquake vulnerability of school buildings: Probabilistic structural fragility analyses. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 67: 169–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haselton, C., A. Whittaker, A. Hortacsu, J. Baker, J. Bray, and D. Grant. 2012. Selecting and scaling earthquake ground motions for performing response-history analyses. Proceedings of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering.

    Google Scholar 

  • HAZUS. 1999. Earthquake Loss Estimation. Washington, DC: Technical Manual, National Institute of Building Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, W.T. 1996. Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings: State of the Practice. In Proceedings of the 11th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Acapulco, Mexico.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, H.H., and J.-W. Jaw. 1990. Probabilistic Damage Analysis of Structures. Journal of Structural Engineering 116: 1992–2007. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1990)116:7(1992)#sthash.gpYo9OKl.dpuf.

  • Ibrahim, Y.E., and M.M. El-Shami. 2011. Seismic Fragility Curves for Mid-Rise Reinforced Concrete Frames in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The IES Journal Part A: Civil & Structural Engineering 4, no. 4: 213–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ioannou, I., J. Douglas, and T. Rossetto. 2015. Assessing the impact of ground-motion variability and uncertainty on empirical fragility curves. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 69: 83–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.10.024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jalayer, F., R. De Risi, and G. Manfredi. 2014. Bayesian Cloud Analysis: Efficient Structural Fragility Assessment Using Linear Regression. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-014-9692-z.

  • Jeon, J., R. DesRoches, I. Brilakis, and L. Lowes. 2012. Aftershock fragility curves for damaged non-ductile reinforced concrete buildings. In 15th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, International Association for Earthquake Engineering (IAEE), Tokyo, Japan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joy, R., C.K. Prasad, and V. Thampan. 2016. Development of Analytical Fragility Curve—A Review, 713–716.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kammula, V., J. Erochko, O.S. Kwon, and C. Christopoulos. 2014. Application of Hybrid-Simulation to Fragility Assessment of the Telescoping Self-Centering Energy Dissipative Bracing System. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 43: 811–830. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kappos, A.J., G. Panagopoulos, C. Panagiotopoulos, and G. Penelis. 2006. A Hybrid Method for the Vulnerability Assessment of R/C and Urm Buildings. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 4: 391–413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-006-9023-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kircher, C. A., A.A. Nassar, O. Kustu, and W.T. Holmes. 1997. Development of Building Damage Functions for Earthquake Loss Estimation. Earthquake Spectra 13: 663–682. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585974.

  • Kirçil, M.S., and Z. Polat. 2006. Fragility Analysis of Mid-Rise R/C Frame Buildings. Engineering Structures 28: 1335–1345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.01.004.

  • Kiremidjian, A.S. 1992. Methods for Regional Damage Estimation. In Proceedings of the 10th World’s Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Madrid, Spain, 19–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, C.R., K.B. Narayan, and D.V. Reddy. 2014. Probabilstic Seismic Risk Evaluation Of RC Buildings. International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology 03 (01): 484–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumitani, S., and T. Takada. 2004. Probabilistic Assessment of Buildings Damage Considering Aftershocks of Earthquakes. In 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y., and D. Moon. 2014. A new methodology of the development of seismic fragility curves. Smart Structures and Systems 14 (5): 847–867.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J., S. Han, and J. Kim. 2014. Seismic Performance Evaluation of Apartment Buildings with Central Core. International Journal of High-Rise Buildings 3 (1): 9–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, K.H., and D.V. Rosowsky. 2006. Fragility Analysis of Woodframe Buildings Considering Combined Snow and Earthquake Loading. Structural Safety 28: 289–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2005.08.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Y., R. Song, and J.W. Van De Lindt. 2014. Collapse Fragility of Steel Structures Subjected to Earthquake Mainshock-Aftershock Sequences. Journal of Structural Engineering.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, K., Y. Li, X. Lu, and H. Guan. 2017. Effects of seismic and progressive collapse designs on the vulnerability of RC frame structures. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 31 (1): 04016079.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luco, N., and C.A. Cornell. 1998. Effects of random connection fractures on the demands and reliability for a 3-story pre-Northridge SMRF structure. In Proceedings of the 6th US national conference on earthquake engineering, vol. 244, 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luco, N., M. Gerstenberger, S. Uma, H. Ryu, A. Liel, and M. Raghunandan. 2011. A Methodology for Post-Mainshock Probabilistic Assessment of Building Collapse Risk. In Ninth Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lupoi, G., P. Franchin, A. Lupoi, and P.E. Pinto. 2006. Seismic Fragility Analysis of Structural Systems. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 132: 385–395. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2006)132:4(385)#sthash.NktwK9pH.dpuf.

  • Manafpour, A.R., and P.K. Moghaddam. 2014. Probabilistic Approach to Performance-Based Seismic Design of RC Frames. Vulnerability, Uncertainty, and Risk: Quantification, Mitigation, and Management, ASCE, 1736–1745.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrum, D.P., G. Amato, and R. Suhail. 2016. Development of Seismic Fragility Functions for a Moment Resisting 44: 42–51. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874836801610010042.

  • Modica, A., and P.J. Stafford. 2014. Vector Fragility Surfaces for Reinforced Concrete Frames in Europe. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-013-9571-z.

  • Mosalam, K. M., G. Ayala, R.N. White, and C. Roth. 1997. Seismic Fragility of Lrc Frames with and without Masonry Infill Walls. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 1: 693–720. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469708962384.

  • Nazri, F., and N. Alexander. 2012. Predicting the Collapse Potential of Structures in Earthquake. University of Bristol.

    Google Scholar 

  • Negulescu, C., T. Ulrich, A. Baills, and D. Seyedi. 2014. Fragility Curves for Masonry Structures Submitted to Permanent Ground Displacements and Earthquakes. Natural Hazards, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1253-x.

  • Pejovic, J., and S. Jankovic, 2016. Seismic fragility assessment for reinforced concrete high-rise buildings in Southern Euro-Mediterranean zone. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 14 (1): 185–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polese, M., M. Di Ludovico, A. Prota, and G. Manfredi. 2013. Damage-Dependent Vulnerability Curves for Existing Buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 42: 853–870. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polese, M., M. Marcolini, G. Zuccaro, F. Cacace. 2014. Mechanism based assessment of damage-dependent fragility curves for RC building classes. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-014-9663-4.

  • Pragalath, D.H., R. Davis, and P. Sarkar. 2015. Reliability Evaluation of Rc Frame by Two Major Fragility Analysis Methods. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering (BHRC) 16: 47–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raghunandan, M., A.B. Liel, and N. Luco. 2014. Aftershock collapse vulnerability assessment of reinforced concrete frame structures. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2478.

  • Reasenberg, A.P., and M.L. John. 2005. Some Facts About Aftershocks to Large Earthquakes in California. USGS open file report, 96–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Réveillère, A., P. Gehl, D. Seyedi, and H. Modaressi. 2012. Development of Seismic Fragility Curves for Mainshock-Damaged Reinforced-Concrete Structures. In Proceedings of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosowsky, D.V., and B.R. Ellingwood. 2002. Performance-based engineering of wood frame housing: Fragility analysis methodology. Journal of Structural Engineering 128 (1): 32–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-García, J., and J.C. Negrete-Manriquez. 2011. Evaluation of Drift Demands in Existing Steel Frames under as-Recorded Far-Field and near-Fault Mainshock–Aftershock Seismic Sequences. Engineering Structures 33: 621–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.11.021.

  • Ryu, H., N. Luco, S. Uma, and A. Liel. 2011. Developing Fragilities for Mainshock-Damaged Structures through Incremental Dynamic Analysis. In Ninth Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seya, H., M.E. Talbott, and H.H. Hwang. 1993. Probabilistic Seismic Analysis of a Steel Frame Structure. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics 8: 127–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-8920(93)90006-H.

  • Shin, J., J. Kim, and K. Lee. 2014. Seismic Assessment of Damaged Piloti-Type Rc Building Subjected to Successive Earthquakes. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shinozuka, M., M.Q. Feng, H.-K. Kim, and S.-H. Kim. 2000. Nonlinear static procedure for fragility curve development. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 126 (12): 1287–1295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shome, N., N. Luco, M.C. Gerstenberger, O.S. Boyd, N.E.H. Field, A.B. Liel, and J.W. van de Lindt. 2014. Aftershock Risks Such as Those Demonstrated by the Recent Events in New Zealand and Japan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silva, V., H. Crowley, H. Varum, R. Pinho, and L. Sousa. 2014a. Development of a Fragility Model for Moment-frame RC buildings in Portugal. 2nd ICVRAM, Liverpool, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silva, V., H. Crowley, H. Varum, R. Pinho, and R. Sousa. 2014b. Evaluation of Analytical Methodologies Used to Derive Vulnerability Functions. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 43: 181–204. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singhal, A., and A.S. Kiremidjian. 1996. Method for Probabilistic Evaluation of Seismic Structural Damage. Journal of Structural Engineering-ASCE 122: 1459–1467. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1996)122:12(1459)#sthash.0ACtmOb5.dpuf.

  • Siqueira, G.H., A.S. Sanda, P. Paultre, and J.E. Padgett. 2014. Fragility Curves for Isolated Bridges in Eastern Canada Using Experimental Results. Engineering Structures 74: 311–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.04.053.

  • Song, R., Y. Li, and J.W. van de Lindt. 2014. Impact of Earthquake Ground Motion Characteristics on Collapse Risk of Post-Mainshock Buildings Considering Aftershocks. Engineering Structures 81: 349–361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.09.047.

  • Sudret, B., C. Mai, and V. Mai. 2013. Computing seismic fragility curves using polynomial chaos expansions, Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sudret, B., C. Mai, and K. Konakli. 2014. Computing seismic fragility curves using non-parametric representations. arXiv:1403.5481.

  • Uhrhammer, R.A. 1986. Characteristics of Northern and Central California Sesimicity. Earthquake Notes 21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uma, S., H. Ryu, N. Luco, A. Liel, and M. Raghunandan. 2011. Comparison of Main-Shock and Aftershock Fragility Curves Developed for New Zealand and Us Buildings. In Proceedings of the ninth pacific conference on earthquake engineering structure building and Earthquake-Resilient Society, Auckland, New Zealand, 14–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vargas, Y.F., L.G. Pujades, A.H. Barbat, and J.E. Hurtado. 2013. Capacity, Fragility and Damage in Reinforced Concrete Buildings: A Probabilistic Approach. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 11: 2007–2032. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-013-9468-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vona, M. 2014. Fragility Curves of Existing Rc Buildings Based on Specific Structural Performance Levels. Open Journal of Civil Engineering. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojce.2014.42011.

  • Wang, Y., and D.V. Rosowsky. 2014. Effects of Earthquake Ground Motion Selection and Scaling Method on Performance-Based Engineering of Wood-Frame Structures. Journal of Structural Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943–541X.0001016#sthash.RitmuRN9.dpuf.

  • Wells, L.A., and K.J. Coppersmith. 1994. New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area and surface displacement. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 84 (4): 974–1002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wijayanti E., F. Kristiawan, E. Purwanto, and S. Sangadji. 2016. Seismic vulnerability of reinforced concrete building based on the development of fragility curve: A case study. Applied Mechanics and Materials 845: 252–258. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.845.252

  • Yamaguchi, N., and F. Yamazaki. 2000. Fragility curves for buildings in Japan based on damage surveys after the 1995 Kobe earthquake. In Proceedings of the 12th conference on earthquake engineering, Auckland, New Zealand.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Civil Engineering, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia

    Fadzli Mohamed Nazri

Authors
  1. Fadzli Mohamed Nazri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fadzli Mohamed Nazri .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mohamed Nazri, F. (2018). Fragility Curves. In: Seismic Fragility Assessment for Buildings due to Earthquake Excitation. SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology(). Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7125-6_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7125-6_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-7124-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-7125-6

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation