Abstract
This paper proposes a modified method to select the optimal intensity measure (IM) in the seismic fragility analysis by the incremental dynamic analysis (IDA). The performance of an IM is evaluated by its efficiency, the efforts on fragility estimation, and sufficiency, the ground motion information represented by the IM. The results by IDA in various IMs are generally obtained by the conversion from that with the scaling factor IM using a given selected ground motions suite. The present study shows that the inter-IM conversion leads to an incompatibility of IM value range at different IDA curves, hindering the normalization for eliminating the difference of unit and range in various IMs. To tackle this issue, a normalization procedure is developed specifically for IDA, employed in the definition of a normalized and relative efficiency metric. Regarding the sufficiency of IM, the information-theory-based metric, the approximate relative sufficiency measure (aRSM), is adopted. It is calculated by the EDP-based approach, consistent with its original definition, rather than the IM-based approach in the literature. By the Bayes' theorem, the prerequisite to neglecting this inconsistence of the IM-based aRSM calculation is derived. It is the approximated equality in the occurrence probabilities of the two compared IMs. A case study is performed in a typical simply-supported high-speed railway bridge and track system to explore the IM performance in different structural components by local EDPs. The feasibility and validity of the proposed method is demonstrated, particularly for the normalization procedure and the EDP-based aRSM calculation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bai J-W, Gardoni P, Hueste MBD (2011) Story-specific demand models and seismic fragility estimates for multi-story buildings. Struct Saf 33:96–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2010.09.002
Baker JW (2015) Efficient analytical fragility function fitting using dynamic structural analysis. Earthq Spectra 31:579–599. https://doi.org/10.1193/021113EQS025M
Baker JW, Cornell CA (2006) Spectral shape, epsilon and record selection. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 35:1077–1095. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.571
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
Baker J (2008) An Introduction to Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA)
Baltzopoulos G, Baraschino R, Iervolino I (2019) On the number of records for structural risk estimation in PBEE. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 48:489–506. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3145
Bojórquez E, Iervolino I (2011) Spectral shape proxies and nonlinear structural response. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 31:996–1008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2011.03.006
Chen M, Mangalathu S, Jeon J-S (2021) Bridge fragilities to network fragilities in seismic scenarios: an integrated approach. Eng Struct 237:112212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112212
Cordova P, Deierlein G, Mehanny S, Cornell CA (2001) Development of a two-parameter seismic intensity measure and probabilistic assessment procedure. Sapporo, Hokkaido
Cornell CA (1968) Engineering seismic risk analysis. Bull Seismol Soc Am 58:1583–1606
Cornell CA, Jalayer F, Hamburger RO, Foutch DA (2002) 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)
Cornell CA, Krawinkler H (2000) Progress and challenges in seismic performance assessment. PEER Center News, Spring. http://peer.berkeley.edu/news/2000spring/index.html
Cui S, Guo C, Su J et al (2019) Seismic fragility and risk assessment of high-speed railway continuous-girder bridge under track constraint effect. Bull Earthq Eng 17:1639–1665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0491-9
Eads L, Miranda E, Krawinkler H, Lignos DG (2013) An efficient method for estimating the collapse risk of structures in seismic regions. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 42:25–41. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2191
Eads L, Miranda E, Lignos DG (2015) Average spectral acceleration as an intensity measure for collapse risk assessment. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 44:2057–2073. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2575
Ebrahimian H, Jalayer F (2021) Selection of seismic intensity measures for prescribed limit states using alternative nonlinear dynamic analysis methods. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 50:1235–1250. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3393
Ebrahimian H, Jalayer F, Lucchini A et al (2015) Preliminary ranking of alternative scalar and vector intensity measures of ground shaking. Bull Earthq Eng 13:2805–2840. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-015-9755-9
FEMA 355C (2000), State of the Art Report on Systems Performance of Steel Moment Frames Subject to Earthquakes - Applied Technology Council Online Store. The SAC Joint Venture for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC
Freddi F, Padgett JE, Dall’Asta A (2017) Probabilistic seismic demand modeling of local level response parameters of an RC frame. Bull Earthq Eng 15:1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-016-9948-x
Gao L (2020) Spatial refinement analysis method of ballastless track of high-speed railway and its application. Science Press, Beijing ((in Chinese))
Ghafory-Ashtiany M, Mousavi M, Azarbakht A (2011) Strong ground motion record selection for the reliable prediction of the mean seismic collapse capacity of a structure group. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 40:691–708. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1055
Ghosh J, Padgett JE (2011) Probabilistic seismic loss assessment of aging bridges using a component-level cost estimation approach. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 40:1743–1761. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1114
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
Härdle WK, Simar L (2015) Applied multivariate statistical analysis, 4th edn. Springer
Iervolino I (2022) Estimation uncertainty for some common seismic fragility curve fitting methods. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 152:107068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.107068
Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration (2022) Emergency Release: Investigation of Typical Bridge Earthquake Damage and Site Liquefaction in the Menyuan Earthquake. https://www.iem.ac.cn/detail.html?id=2340. Accessed 22 Jan 2022
Jalayer F, Cornell CA (2009) Alternative non-linear demand estimation methods for probability-based seismic assessments. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 38:951–972. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.876
Jalayer F, Beck JL, Zareian F (2012) Analyzing the sufficiency of alternative scalar and vector intensity measures of ground shaking based on information theory. J Eng Mech 138:307–316. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000327
Jalayer F, Ebrahimian H, Miano A et al (2017) Analytical fragility assessment using unscaled ground motion records. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 46:2639–2663. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2922
Jiang L, Yu J, Zhou W et al (2020a) Applicability analysis of high-speed railway system under the action of near-fault ground motion. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 139:106289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106289
Jiang L, Zhang Y, Feng Y et al (2020b) Simplified calculation modeling method of multi-span bridges on high-speed railways under earthquake condition. Bull Earthq Eng 18:2303–2328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00779-x
Jiang L, Peng K, Yu J et al (2022) The influence of trains on the seismic response of simply-supported beam bridges with different pier heights expressed through an impact factor. Bull Earthq Eng 20:2795–2814. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-022-01343-w
Kazantzi AK, Vamvatsikos D (2015) Intensity measure selection for vulnerability studies of building classes. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 44:2677–2694. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2603
Khosravikia F, Clayton P (2020) Updated evaluation metrics for optimal intensity measure selection in probabilistic seismic demand models. Eng Struct 202:109899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.109899
Li Q, Ellingwood BR (2007) Performance evaluation and damage assessment of steel frame buildings under main shock–aftershock earthquake sequences. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 36:405–427. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.667
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
Málaga-Chuquitaype C, Bougatsas K (2017) Vector-IM-based assessment of alternative framing systems under bi-directional ground-motion. Eng Struct 132:188–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.11.021
Nielson BG, DesRoches R (2007) Seismic fragility methodology for highway bridges using a component level approach. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 36:823–839. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.655
O’Reilly GJ (2021) Seismic intensity measures for risk assessment of bridges. Bull Earthq Eng 19:3671–3699. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-021-01114-z
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
Pang Y, Wang X (2021) Cloud-IDA-MSA conversion of fragility curves for efficient and high-fidelity resilience assessment. J Struct Eng 147:04021049. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002998
Shome N, Cornell CA (1999) Probabilistic seismic demand analysis of nonlinear structures. Stanford University, Stanford
Tothong P, Luco N (2007) Probabilistic seismic demand analysis using advanced ground motion intensity measures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 36:1837–1860. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.696
Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA (2002) Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 31:491–514. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.141
Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA (2004) Applied incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq Spectra 20:523–553. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1737737
Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA (2005) Developing efficient scalar and vector intensity measures for IDA capacity estimation by incorporating elastic spectral shape information. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 34:1573–1600. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.496
Wang X, Shafieezadeh A, Ye A (2018) Optimal intensity measures for probabilistic seismic demand modeling of extended pile-shaft-supported bridges in liquefied and laterally spreading ground. Bull Earthq Eng 16:229–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0199-2
Wei B, Yang T, Jiang L, He X (2018) Effects of uncertain characteristic periods of ground motions on seismic vulnerabilities of a continuous track–bridge system of high-speed railway. Bull Earthq Eng 16:3739–3769. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0326-8
Wei B, Li C, He X (2019) The applicability of different earthquake intensity measures to the seismic vulnerability of a high-speed railway continuous bridge. Int J Civ Eng 17:981–997. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-018-0347-3
Wei B, Wang W-H, Wang P et al (2020) Seismic responses of a high-speed railway (HSR) bridge and track simulation under longitudinal earthquakes. J Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2020.1832937
Wen T, Jiang L-Z, Jiang L et al (2022) Interlayer area damage modeling and damage-based seismic fragility analysis of high-speed railway bridge and track system. Eng Struct 272:114989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.114989
Zareian F, Krawinkler H, Ibarra L, Lignos D (2010) Basic concepts and performance measures in prediction of collapse of buildings under earthquake ground motions. Struct Design Tall Spec Build 19:167–181. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.546
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No. U193420118 and No. 52178180, and the Fundamental Research Funds of Central South University under Grant No. 2019zzts285.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
TW: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Software, Data Curation, Visualization, Writing-Original draft preparation. LJ: Conceptualization, Supervision, Project Administration, Funding Acquisition. LJ: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing-review & editing. WZ: Software. YD: Supervision, Writing- Review & Editing.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Wen, T., Jiang, L., Jiang, L. et al. Optimal intensity measure selection in incremental dynamic analysis: methodology improvements and application to a high-speed railway bridge. Bull Earthquake Eng 22, 2059–2083 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-023-01840-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-023-01840-6