Solution to the PEER framing equations accounting for dependence of earthquake repair costs on the number of damaged components

References

• ASTM. 2007. E2026-07 Standard guide for seismic risk assessment of buildings. West Conshohocken, PA: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Ang, A. H. S., & Tang, W. H. (2007). Probability concepts in engineering: Emphasis on applications to civil and environmental engineering. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Bradley, B., Lee, D., Broughton, R., & Price, C. (2009). Efficient evaluation of performance-based earthquake engineering equations. Structural Safety, 31, 65–74.10.1016/j.strusafe.2008.03.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradley, B., & Lee, D. (2010a). Accuracy of approximate methods of uncertainty propagation in seismic loss estimation. Structural Safety, 32, 13–24.10.1016/j.strusafe.2009.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradley, B. A., & Lee, D. S. (2010b). Component correlations in structure-specific seismic loss estimation. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 39, 237–258.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradley, B. A., Cubrinovski, M., Dhakal, R. P., & MacRae, G. A. (2010). Probabilistic seismic performance and loss assessment of a bridge–foundation–soil system. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 30, 395–411.10.1016/j.soildyn.2009.12.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baker, J., & Cornell, A. (2003). Uncertainty specification and propagation for loss estimation using FOSM method (PEER Report 2003/07). Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Centre, University of California.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, J., & Cornell, C. A. (2008). Uncertainty propagation in probabilistic seismic loss estimation. Structural Safety, 30, 236–252.10.1016/j.strusafe.2006.11.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ching, J., Porter, K., & Beck, J. (2009). Propagating uncertainties for loss estimation in performance-based earthquake engineering using moment matching. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 5, 245–262.10.1080/15732470701298323
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cornell, C., & Krawinkler, H. (2000). Progress and challenges in seismic performance assessment. PEER Centre News, 3(2), 1–3.
   Google Scholar
• Cutfield, M., Ryan, K., & Ma, Q. (2016). Comparative life cycle analysis of conventional and base-isolated buildings. Earthquake Spectra, 32, 323–343.10.1193/032414EQS040M
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2012a). FEMA P-58-1: Seismic performance assessment of buildings, volume 1 – Methodology. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2012b). FEMA P-58-2 Seismic performance assessment of buildings, volume 2 – Implementation guide. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2012c). FEMA P-58-3 Seismic performance assessment of buildings, volume 3 – Supporting electronic materials and background documentation. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Goulet, C. A., Haselton, C. B., Mitrani-Reiser, J., Beck, J. L., Deierlein, G. G., Porter, K. A., & Stewart, J. P. (2007). Evaluation of the seismic performance of a code-conforming reinforced-concrete frame building-from seismic hazard to collapse safety and economic losses. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 36, 1973–1997.10.1002/(ISSN)1096-9845
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jarrett, J. A., Judd, J. P., & Charney, F. A. (2015). Comparative evaluation of innovative and traditional seismic-resisting systems using the FEMA P-58 procedure. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 105, 107–118.10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.10.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krawinkler, H. (2002, August 19–20). A general approach to seismic performance assessment. Paper presented at the International Conference on Advances and New Challenges in Earthquake Engineering Research, (ICANCEER 2002), Hong Kong.
   Google Scholar
• Kutsu, O. (1986, August 24–28). Earthquake damage prediction for buildings using component test data, in Proceedings of the 3rd U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Charleston: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Kutsu, O., Miller, D., & Brokken, S. (1982). Development of damage functions for highrise building components. San Francisco, CA: URS/John A. Blume & Associates for the US Department of Energy.
   Google Scholar
• MathWorks. (2012). MATLAB and statistics toolbox, release 2012b. Natick, MA: MathWorks Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Melchers, R. E. (1999). Structural reliability analysis and prediction. Chichester: Wiley and Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, K. A., Kiremidjian, A. S., & LeGrue, J. S. (2001). Assembly‐based vulnerability of buildings and its use in performance evaluation. Earthquake Spectra, 17, 291–312.10.1193/1.1586176
   Google Scholar
• Porter, K. A., Beck, J. L., & Shaikhutdinov, R. V. (2002). Sensitivity of building loss estimates to major uncertain variables. Earthquake Spectra, 18(4), 719–744.10.1193/1.1516201
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenblueth, E. (1975). Point estimates for probability moments. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 72, 3812–3814.10.1073/pnas.72.10.3812
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scholl, R. (1981). Seismic damage assessment for high-rise buildings (Annual Technical Report 81-381, 143 pp). Menlo Park, CA: US Geological Survey.
   Google Scholar
• Singhal, A., & Kiremidjian, A. S. (1997). A method for earthquake motion-damage relationships with application to reinforced concrete frames (Technical Report NCEER 97-0008, p. 218). Buffalo, NY: National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research.
   Google Scholar
• USGS (2016). Hazard Curve Application, Version 1.0.1. Geologic Hazards Science Center, United States Geological Survey. Accessed January 2016 from https://geohazards.usgs.gov/hazardtool/
   Google Scholar