Elsevier

Structural Safety

Volume 32, Issue 1, January 2010, Pages 1-12
Structural Safety

Seismic fragilities for non-ductile reinforced concrete frames – Role of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2009.04.003Get rights and content

Abstract

Seismic fragilities are essential to earthquake loss estimation and performance-based earthquake engineering in regions of high seismicity. Construction practices for frames in regions of moderate seismicity are quite different, and such frames have received less attention in the literature. Fragilities for performance levels identified in recent seismic regulations are developed herein for reinforced concrete frames designed for gravity load in low-seismic regions using probabilistic non-linear finite element analysis. An examination of the contribution of uncertainties in material and structural parameters reveals that structural damping, concrete strength, and cracking strain in beam–column joints have the greatest impact on the fragilities of such frames. However, fragilities that incorporate these sources of uncertainty are only slightly different from those based solely on the uncertainty in seismic demand from earthquake ground motion, suggesting that fragilities that are developed under the assumption that all structural parameters are deterministic and equal to their median (or mean) values are sufficient for purposes of earthquake damage and loss estimation in regions of moderate seismicity. Confidence bounds on the fragilities are also presented as a measure of their accuracy for risk-informed decision-making, for prioritizing risk mitigation efforts in regions of low-to-moderate seismicity.

Introduction

The consequence-based risk management paradigm [1] developed as part of the research program in the Mid-America Earthquake (MAE) Center requires quantitative modeling and propagation of all sources of uncertainty within a probabilistic risk assessment framework. This paradigm also has supported the MAE Center’s recent effort to examine the potential impact of future earthquakes that may occur in the New Madrid Seismic Zone (NMSZ) on civil infrastructure in the Central and Eastern United States (CEUS). The NMSZ is capable of generating great earthquakes infrequently (the return period of magnitude seven events in the NMSZ is believed to be approximately 500 years [2]). Buildings in population centers such as Memphis, TN and St. Louis, MO in proximity to the NMSZ have not been designed with any consideration of seismic effects until recently. Accordingly, a major portion of the building inventory in that region is at risk, to an unknown degree.

As part of this MAE Center effort, seismic fragilities, which describe the probabilities of failure to meet performance levels as functions of earthquake ground motion intensity, of three-, six-, and nine-story gravity load designed (GLD) reinforced concrete (RC) frames1 that typify pre-1990 RC construction practices for low-, mid-, and high-rise RC frames in the CEUS were evaluated in a recently published study [3]. These seismic fragilities were developed using finite element-based non-linear time history analysis (NTHA), in which the structural parameters were set equal to their median values, as did the analyses reported in most previous studies (e.g. [4]). Thus, the seismic demands on these frames and their fragilities reflected solely the uncertainty in earthquake ground motion intensity.

The question naturally arises as to the extent to which uncertainties in structural properties might influence the seismic demand and, by extension, the fragilities and damage estimates for GLD RC frames. The question is especially pertinent in light of the known deficiencies and uncertainties in the performance of beam–column joints in such frames (e.g., weak column–strong beam design, lack of shear reinforcement and insufficient bar development length within joints) [5], [6]. To address this question, this paper examines the contribution of uncertainties in structural strength, stiffness, etc. to the overall seismic fragilities of the GLD RC frames studied previously [3]. The sensitivity of frame response statistics to the uncertainties in beam–column joint model parameters, as well as material and structural properties, is investigated at various levels of earthquake hazard for Memphis, TN, which is the largest population center (approximately 1 million in its metropolitan area) close to the NMSZ. In addition, confidence bounds on the fragilities are developed to provide a sense of their accuracy for decision- and policy-makers in prioritizing risk mitigation efforts and in developing post-earthquake response and recovery strategies [7].

Section snippets

Modeling beam–column joints in finite element analysis of gravity load designed reinforced concrete frames

RC frame structures constitute 16% of the buildings with appraised value greater than $5 million according to a survey of the building infrastructure in Shelby County, TN [8]. Such GLD RC frames in the CEUS traditionally have been designed using detailing provisions of ACI Standard 318 [9] for gravity load (or gravity plus wind load) effects only. These reinforcing details provide only a limited degree of ductility for frames in low-seismic regions, which often leads to so-called weak

Earthquake ground motions

Most seismic fragility analyses of frames in high-seismic regions performed previously (e.g. [11]) utilize natural strong ground motion records in the NTHA. Such records are unavailable for sites in the CEUS due to the infrequent nature of the earthquakes in that region. Accordingly, ensembles of synthetic earthquake ground motions that were developed specifically for the NMSZ under the auspices of the MAE Center by Wen and Wu [12] were utilized in the finite element models. The Wen–Wu ground

Fundamental modeling approach

A seismic fragility is defined herein as the probability of reaching stipulated damage states (performance levels) as a function of a specified measure of earthquake ground motion intensity. The fragility is described by the conditional probability that the structural capacity, C, fails to resist the structural demand, D, given the seismic intensity (hazard), SI, (the terms C, D, and SI in units that are suitable for seismic fragility assessment are defined subsequently) and is commonly modeled

Sensitivity of seismic demand to parameter uncertainties

Frame response statistics were determined using the earthquake ensembles identified in Fig. 3 for three levels of earthquake hazard for Memphis, TN: 10%, 5%, and 2% PE in 50 years. The values of Sa(T1)3 for these mean hazard events are listed in Table 34 for all three frames, as obtained from the seismic hazard

Treatment of uncertainty in fragility estimates

Seismic fragilities that incorporate sources of uncertainty considered above can be derived efficiently using Latin-hypercube sampling (LHS) [21] coupled to the finite element structural models. LHS provides a stratified sampling scheme rather than the purely random sampling, providing a more efficient means for covering the probability space than naïve Monte Carlo simulation. The sampling plan is given byS=1N(P-R)where P is an N × K matrix, in which each of the K columns is a random permutation

Conclusions

The sensitivity of the response statistics of gravity load designed reinforced concrete frames to the uncertainties in material and structural properties and modeling parameters was investigated at various levels of earthquake hazard for Memphis, TN. Damping, concrete strength, and joint cracking strain were found to have the greatest impact on the response statistics. However, the uncertainty in ground motion dominated the overall uncertainty in structural response. This finding is consistent

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the National Science Foundation under grant EEC-9701785 to the Mid-America Earthquake Center. This support is gratefully acknowledged. However, the views expressed are solely those of the authors and may not represent the position of either the MAE Center or the NSF. The authors would like to express their appreciation to Prof. Ross Corotis, former Editor of Structural Safety, for managing the review of this manuscript in accordance with journal policies for peer

References (27)

  • H. Aslani et al.

    Probability-based seismic response analysis

    Eng Struct

    (2005)
  • A. Olsson et al.

    On Latin hypercube sampling for structural reliability analysis

    Struct Safety

    (2003)
  • O.S. Kwon et al.

    The effect of material and ground motion uncertainty on the seismic vulnerability of RC structure

    Eng Struct

    (2006)
  • Abrams DP. Consequence-based engineering approaches for reducing loss in Mid-America. Linbeck distinguished lecture...
  • USGS. Earthquake hazard in the heart of the homeland. USGS Fact Sheet FS-131-02, US Geological Survey;...
  • O.C. Celik et al.

    Seismic risk assessment of gravity load designed reinforced concrete frames subjected to Mid-America ground motions

    J Struct Eng (ASCE)

    (2009)
  • S.K. Ramamoorthy et al.

    Seismic fragility and confidence bounds for gravity load designed reinforced concrete frames of varying height

    J Struct Eng (ASCE)

    (2008)
  • O.C. Celik et al.

    Modeling beam–column joints in fragility assessment of gravity load designed reinforced concrete frames

    J Earthquake Eng

    (2008)
  • Celik OC. Probabilistic assessment of non-ductile reinforced concrete frames susceptible to Mid-America ground motions....
  • Y.K. Wen et al.

    The role of fragility assessment in consequence-based engineering

    Earthquake Spectra (EERI)

    (2005)
  • French S, Olshansky R. Inventory of essential facilities in Mid-America. Project SE-1 final report, Mid-America...
  • ACI Committee 318. Building code requirements for reinforced concrete (ACI 318-89) and commentary (ACI 318R-89)....
  • McKenna F, Fenves GL. Open system for earthquake engineering simulation (OpenSees) user manual. University of...
  • Cited by (291)

    • Probabilistic sensitivity matrices under stressor uncertainty

      2024, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text