Probabilistic seismic assessment of reinforced concrete bridges using simulated records

References

• A.N.A.S S.p.A. (2020). LISTINO PREZZI 2020, NC-MS.2020 – Rev.1, Nouve Costruzioni – Manutenzione Straordinaria. Direzione Ingegneria e Verifiche (in Italian). Retrieved from https://www.stradeanas.it/it/elenco-prezzi.
   Google Scholar
• Akkar, S., Sandıkkaya, M. A., & Ay, B. (2014). Compatible ground-motion prediction equations for damping scaling factors and vertical-to-horizontal spectral amplitude ratios for the broader Europe region. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 12, 517–547. doi:10.1007/s10518-013-9537-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akkar, S., Sandıkkaya, M. A., & Bommer, J. J. (2014). Empirical ground-motion models for point- and extended-source crustal earthquake scenarios in Europe and the Middle East. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 12, 359–387. doi:10.1007/s10518-013-9461-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ancheta, T. D., Darragh, R. B., Stewart, J. P., Seyhan, E., Silva, W. J., Chiou, B. S. J., … Donahue, J. L. (2014). NGA-West2 database. Earthquake Spectra, 30(3), 989–1005. doi:10.1193/070913EQS197M
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atkinson, G. M., Goda, K., & Assatourians, K. (2011). Comparison of nonlinear structural responses for accelerograms simulated from the stochastic finite-fault approach versus hybrid broadband approach. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 101(6), 2967–2980. doi:10.1785/0120100308
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baker, J. W. (2015). Efficient analytical fragility function fitting using dynamic structural analysis. Earthquake Spectra, 31(1), 579–599. doi:10.1193/021113EQS025M
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernier, C., Padgett, J. E., Proulx, J., & Paultre, P. (2016). Seismic fragility of concrete gravity dams with spatial variation of angle of friction: case study. Journal of Structural Engineering, 142(5), 05015002. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001441
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bisadi, V., & Padgett, J. E. (2015). Explicit time-dependent multi-hazard cost analysis based on parameterized demand models for the optimum design of bridge structures. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 30(7), 541–554. doi:10.1111/mice.12131
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boore, D. M. (1983). Stochastic simulation of high-frequency ground motions based on seismological models of the radiated spectra. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 73(6A), 1865–1894. doi:10.1785/BSSA07306A1865
   Google Scholar
• Boore, D. M., & Joyner, W. B. (1997). Site amplifications for generic rock sites. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 87(2): 327–341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calvi, G. M., Pinho, R., Magenes, G., Bommer, J. J., Restrepo-Vélez, L. F., & Crowley, H. (2006). Development of seismic vulnerability assessment methodologies over the past 30 years. ISET Journal of Earthquake Technology, 43(3), 75–104.
   Google Scholar
• Cornell, C. A., & Krawinkler, H. (2000). Progress and challenges in seismic performance assessment. PEER Center News.
   Google Scholar
• Cosenza, E., Del Vecchio, C., Di Ludovico, M., Dolce, M., Moroni, C., Prota, A., & Renzi, E. (2018). The Italian guidelines for seismic risk classification of constructions: technical principles and validation. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 16(12), 5905–5935. doi:10.1007/s10518-018-0431-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danciu, L., Şeşetyan, K., Demircioglu, M., Gülen, L., Zare, M., Basili, R., … Giardini, D. (2018). The 2014 earthquake model of the Middle East: Seismogenic sources. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 16(8), 3465–3496. doi:10.1007/s10518-017-0096-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA P-58. (2012). Seismic performance assessment of buildings. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
   Google Scholar
• Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA 273. (1997). NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
   Google Scholar
• Galanis, P. H., & Moehle, J. P. (2015). Development of collapse indicators for risk assessment of older-type reinforced concrete buildings. Earthquake Spectra, 31(4), 1991–2006. doi:10.1193/080613EQS225M
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galasso, C., Kaviani, P., Tsioulou, A., & Zareian, F. (2020). Validation of ground motion simulations for historical events using skewed bridges. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 24(10), 1652–1674. doi:10.1080/13632469.2018.1483277
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gentile, R., & Galasso, C. (2020). Gaussian process regression for seismic fragility assessment of building portfolios. Structural Safety, 87, 101980. doi:10.1016/j.strusafe.2020.101980
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Günay, S., & Mosalam, K. M. (2013). PEER performance-based earthquake engineering methodology, revisited. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 17(6), 829–858. doi:10.1080/13632469.2013.787377
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haselton, C. B., Baker, J. W., Stewart, J. P., Whittaker, A. S., Luco, N., Fry, A., … Pekelnicky, R. G. (2017). Response history analysis for the design of new buildings in the NEHRP provisions and ASCE/SEI 7 standard: Part I - Overview and specification of ground motions. Earthquake Spectra, 33(2), 373–395. doi:10.1193/032114EQS039M
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HAZUS-MH-MR1. (2003). Multi-hazard loss estimation methodology earthquake model. In Advances Engineering Building Module.
   Google Scholar
• Jalayer, F., & Cornell, C. A. (2009). Alternative non-linear demand estimation methods for probability-based seismic assessments. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 38(8), 951–972. doi:10.1002/eqe.876
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jalayer, F., De Risi, R., & Manfredi, G. (2015). Bayesian cloud analysis: efficient structural fragility assessment using linear regression. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 13(4), 1183–1203. doi:10.1007/s10518-014-9692-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jalayer, F., Ebrahimian, H., Miano, A., Manfredi, G., & Sezen, H. (2017). Analytical fragility assessment using unscaled ground motion records. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 46(15), 2639–2663. doi:10.1002/eqe.2922
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jayaram, N., Lin, T., & Baker, J. W. (2011). A Computationally efficient ground-motion selection algorithm for matching a target response spectrum mean and variance. Earthquake Spectra, 27(3), 797–815. doi:10.1193/1.3608002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kameshwar, S., & Padgett, J. E. (2017). Characterizing and predicting seismic repair costs for bridges. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 22(11), 04017083. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001129
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karimzadeh, S., Askan, A., & Yakut, A. (2018). Assessment of simulated ground motions in earthquake engineering practice: a case study for Duzce (Turkey). In Best practices in physics-based fault rupture models for seismic hazard assessment of nuclear installations, edited by Dalguer L.A., Fukushima Y., Irikura K., and Wu C., Springer, Switzerland, pp. 265–283. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-72709-7_16
   Google Scholar
• Karimzadeh, S., Ozsarac, V., Askan, A., & Erberik, M. A. (2019). Use of simulated ground motions for the evaluation of energy response of simple structural systems. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 123, 525–542. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.05.024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kircher, C. A., Whitman, R. V., & Holmes, W. T. (2006). HAZUS earthquake loss estimation methods. Natural Hazards Review, 7(2), 45–59. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1527-6988(2006)7:2(45)
   Google Scholar
• Kohrangi, M., Bazzurro, P., Vamvatsikos, D., & Spillatura, A. (2017). Conditional spectrum-based ground motion record selection using average spectral acceleration. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 46(10), 1667–1685. doi:10.1002/eqe.2876
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mackie, K. R., Wong, J. M., & Stojadinovic, B. (2011). Bridge damage and loss scenarios calibrated by schematic design and cost estimation of repairs. Earthquake Spectra, 27(4), 1127–1145. doi:10.1193/1.3651362
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mander, J. B., Priestley, M. J. N., & Park, R. (1988). Theoretical stress‐strain model for confined concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering, 114(8), 1804–1826. doi:10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804)
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Massey, F. J. (1951). The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for goodness of fit. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 46(253), 68–78. doi:10.1080/01621459.1951.10500769
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menegotto, M., & Pinto, P. E. (1973). Method of analysis for cyclically loaded R. C. plane frames including changes in geometry and non-elastic behavior of elements under combined normal force and bending. In Proceedings of IABSE Symposium on Resistance and Ultimate Deformability of Structures Acted on by Well Defined Loads (pp. 15–22).
   Google Scholar
• Mohammadioun, B., & Serva, L. (2001). Stress drop, slip type, earthquake magnitude, and seismic hazard. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 91(4), 694–707. doi:10.1785/0120000067
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Motazedian, D., & Atkinson, G. M. (2005). Stochastic finite-fault modeling based on a dynamic corner frequency. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 95(3), 995–1010. doi:10.1785/0120030207
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nielson, B. G., & DesRoches, R. (2007). Seismic fragility methodology for highway bridges using a component level approach. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 36(6), 823–839. doi:10.1002/eqe.655
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Reilly, G., & Monteiro, R. (2019). On the efficient risk assessment of bridge structures. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (COMPDYN 2019) (pp. 473–483). doi:10.7712/120119.6933.18933
   Google Scholar
• Olsen, K. B., & Mayhew, J. E. (2010). Goodness-of-fit criteria for broadband synthetic seismograms, with application to the 2008 Mw 5.4 Chino Hills, California, Earthquake. Seismological Research Letters, 81(5), 715–723. doi:10.1785/gssrl.81.5.715
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozsarac, V., Karimzadeh, S., Askan, A., & Erberik, M. A. (2021). Seismic demands of bare and base-isolated steel frames for real against simulated records of a past earthquake. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering. doi:10.1080/15732479.2021.1895227
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozsarac, V. (2020). EzGM, Toolbox for ground motion processing and CS-based selection. Retrieved from https://github.com/volkanozsarac/EzGM.git.
   Google Scholar
• Ozsarac, V., Karimzadeh, S., Askan, A., & Erberik, M. A. (2019). Comparison of energy-based responses of structural systems to real and simulated ground motion records. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (COMPDYN 2019) (pp. 2234–2243). doi:10.7712/120119.7073.18606
   Google Scholar
• Padgett, J. E., Desroches, R., & Nilsson, E. (2010). Regional seismic risk assessment of bridge network in Charleston, South Carolina. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 14(6), 918–933. doi:10.1080/13632460903447766
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pagani, M., Monelli, D., Weatherill, G., Danciu, L., Crowley, H., Silva, V., … Vigano, D. (2014). Openquake engine: An open hazard (and risk) software for the global earthquake model. Seismological Research Letters, 85(3), 692–702. doi:10.1785/0220130087
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perdomo, C., Abarca, A., & Monteiro, R. (2020). Estimation of seismic expected annual losses for multi-span continuous RC bridge portfolios using a component-level approach. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, doi:10.1080/13632469.2020.1781710
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perdomo, C., & Monteiro, R. (2020). Simplified damage models for circular section reinforced concrete bridge columns. Engineering Structures, 217, 110794. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110794
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perdomo, C., Monteiro, R., & Sucuoğlu, H. (2020). Development of fragility curves for single-column RC Italian bridges using nonlinear static analysis. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, doi:10.1080/13632469.2020.1760153
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinho, R., Monteiro, R., Casarotti, C., & Delgado, R. (2009). Assessment of continuous span bridges through nonlinear static procedures. Earthquake Spectra, 25(1), 143–159. doi:10.1193/1.3050449
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter, K. A. (2003). An overview of PEER’s performance-based earthquake engineering methodology. In 9th International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering.
   Google Scholar
• Priestley, M. J. N. (2000). Performance based seismic design. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 33(3), 325–346. doi:10.5459/bnzsee.33.3.325-346
   Google Scholar
• Priestley, M. J. N., & Grant, D. N. (2005). Viscous damping in seismic design and analysis. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 9(sup2), 229–255. doi:10.1142/S1363246905002365
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Priestley, M. J. N., Seible, F., & Calvi, G. M. (1996). Seismic design and retrofit of bridges. New York: John Wiley & Sons. doi:10.1002/9780470172858
   Google Scholar
• Scott, B. D., Park, R., & Priestley, M. J. N. (1982). Stress-strain behavior of concrete confined by overlapping hoops at low and high strain rates. Journal of the American Concrete Institute, 79(1), 13–27. doi:10.14359/10875
   Google Scholar
• SEAOC Vision 2000. (1995). Performance based seismic engineering of buildings. Sacramento, CA: Structural Engineers Association of California.
   Google Scholar
• Shapiro, S. S., & Wilk, M. B. (1965). An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika, 52(3–4), 591–611. doi:10.2307/2333709
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silva, V., Crowley, H., Varum, H., Pinho, R., & Sousa, R. (2014). Evaluation of analytical methodologies used to derive vulnerability functions. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 43(2), 181–204. doi:10.1002/eqe.2337
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sørensen, M. B., & Lang, D. H. (2015). Incorporating simulated ground motion in seismic risk assessment: Application to the lower Indian Himalayas. Earthquake Spectra, 31(1), 71–95. doi:10.1193/010412EQS001M
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spacone, E., Ciampi, V., & Filippou, F. C. (1992). A beam element for seismic damage analysis. California: Earthquake Engineering Research Center Berkeley.
   Google Scholar
• Ugurhan, B., & Askan, A. (2010). Stochastic strong ground motion simulation of the 12 november 1999 Düzce (Turkey) earthquake using a dynamic Corner frequency approach. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 100(4), 1498–1512. doi:10.1785/0120090358
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ugurhan, B., Askan, A., & Erberik, M. A. (2011). A methodology for seismic loss estimation in urban regions based on ground-motion simulations. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 101(2), 710–725. doi:10.1785/0120100159
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Utkucu, M., Nalbant, S. S., McCloskey, J., Steacy, S., & Alptekin, Ö. (2003). Slip distribution and stress changes associated with the 1999 November 12, Düzce (Turkey) earthquake (Mw = 7.1). Geophysical Journal International, 153(1), 229–241. doi:10.1046/j.1365-246X.2003.01904.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Welch, B. L. (1938). The significance of the difference between two means when the population variances are unequal. Biometrika, 29(3–4), 350–362. doi:10.2307/2332010
   Google Scholar
• Wells, D. L., & Coppersmith, K. J. (1994). New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement. Bulletin - Seismological Society of America, 84(4), 974–1002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zelaschi, C., Monteiro, R., & Pinho, R. (2016). Parametric characterization of RC bridges for seismic assessment purposes. Structures, 7, 14–24. doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2016.04.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu, M., McKenna, F., & Scott, M. H. (2018). OpenSeesPy: Python library for the OpenSees finite element framework. SoftwareX, 7, 6–11. doi:10.1016/j.softx.2017.10.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar