Financial and Environmental Payback Periods of Seismic Retrofit Investments for Reinforced Concrete Buildings Estimated Using a Novel Method
Publication: Journal of Architectural Engineering
Volume 19, Issue 2
Abstract
Generally, in seismic retrofit design, seismic performance of a RC building can be upgraded to meet or exceed code requirements by upgrading the structural strength, ductility, or a combination of both. Except for safety, financial and environmental benefits of seismic retrofit investments are not considered in seismic retrofit design. However, financial and environmental benefits are very important information for decision making in seismic retrofit investments. In this work, a novel method for estimating seismic damage to an RC building is constructed based of the hazard curve of response spectral acceleration. Additionally, earthquakes are assumed to follow a Poisson process when analyzing the probability of a specified damage state within a specified service period and modeling expected costs caused by seismic damage. In addition to costs, emissions caused by seismic retrofit and repairs are considered the environmental impact when assessing payback periods of seismic retrofit investments based on the economic and environmental aspects of low-rise RC buildings. In a case study, 16 practical seismic retrofit projects for RC school buildings in Taipei, Taiwan, were analyzed to determine their financial and environmental payback periods. This paper shows that return on the seismic retrofit investments was both environmentally and economically positive.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank the National Science Council of the Republic of China, Taiwan, for financially supporting this research under Contract No. NSC-100-2628-E-011-006.
References
Applied Technology Council (ATC). (1985). “Earthquake damage evaluation data for California.” Rep. ATC-13, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA.
Applied Technology Council (ATC). (1996). “Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings.” Rep. ATC-40, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA.
Architecture Institute of Japan (AIJ). (2005). Guidelines for performance evaluation of earthquake resistant reinforced concrete buildings, Architecture Institute of Japan, Tokyo.
Arias A. (1970). A measure of the earthquake intensity in seismic design for nuclear power, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 438–468.
Chang, Y. S., Cheng, Y. L., Lin, S. T., and Sheu, M. S. (2002). “A simplified evaluation method for the emission of buildings in Taiwan.” J. Archit., 41, 1–21.
Chang, Y. W., Jean, W. Y., Wen, K. L., and Loh, C. H. (2007). “The application of time-predictable characteristic earthquake model for evaluation of design earthquake in Taiwan.” Proc., 10th Int. Conf. on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering, Taylor & Francis, U.K.
Chiu, C. K., Noguchi, T., Kanematsu, M., and Chien, W. Y. (2006). “Studying on experiments of retrofit for typical structures of primary and secondary schools in Taiwan.” Proc. Jpn. Concrete Inst., 28(2), 1591–1596.
Chung, L. L. (2009). “Seismic upgrading of school buildings (I)—Strategy.” Proc., Int. Conf. in Commemoration of the 10th Anniversary of the 1999 Chi-Chi Earthquake, National Science Council, Taipei, Taiwan.
Cornell, C. A. (1968). “Engineering seismic risk analysis.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 58(5), 1583–1606.
Der-Kiureghian, A., and Ang, A. H.-S. (1977). “A fault-rupture model for seismic risk analysis.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 67(4), 1173–1194.
Hsiao, F. P. (2009). “Seismic upgrading of school buildings (II)—Technology.” Proc., Int. Conf. in Commemoration of the 10th Anniversary of the 1999 Chi-Chi Earthquake, National Science Council, Taipei, Taiwan.
Kanda, J., and Shah, H. (1997). “Engineering role in failure cost evaluation for buildings.” Struct. Saf., 19(1), 79–90.
Manfredi, G. (2001). “Evaluation of seismic energy demand.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dynam., 30(4), 485–499.
Minister of the Interior of Taiwan (MOI). (2005). Seismic design code for buildings, Minister of the Interior of Taiwan, Taipei, Taiwan.
National Center for Research on Earthquake Engineering (NCREE). (2008a). “Seismic retrofitting and experiment verification for typical school buildings.” NCREE-08-038, Taipei, Taiwan.
National Center for Research on Earthquake Engineering (NCREE). (2008b). “Technology handbook for seismic evaluation and retrofit of school buildings.” NCREE-08-023, Taipei, Taiwan.
Okano, H., and Miyamoto, Y. (2002). “Equations derived from equivalent linearization method—Consideration based on energy balance and its application to evaluation of probability of excess of deformation capacity.” J. Struct. Constr. Eng., 562, 45–52.
Padgett, J. E., Dennemann, K., and Ghosh, J. (2010). “Risk-based seismic life-cycle cost-benefit (LCC-B) analysis for bridge retrofit assessment.” Struct. Saf., 32(3), 165–173.
Park, Y. J., and Ang, A. H.-S. (1985). “Mechanistic seismic damage model for reinforced concrete.” J. Struct. Eng., 111(4), 722–739.
Williams, R. J., Gardoni, P., and Bracci, J. M. (2009). “Decision analysis for seismic retrofit of structures.” Struct. Saf., 31(2), 188–196.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Architectural Engineering
Volume 19 • Issue 2 • June 2013
Pages: 112 - 118
Copyright
© 2013 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jan 25, 2012
Accepted: Aug 2, 2012
Published online: Aug 13, 2012
Published in print: Jun 1, 2013
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.