Collapse Fragility Curves for RC Buildings Exhibiting Brittle Failure Modes
Publication: Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 144, Issue 2
Abstract
Defining the collapse probability of existing nonseismically designed RC buildings is a challenge mainly due to the fact that its determination relies on the simulation of the brittle failure modes controlling the collapse mechanism. Routine nonlinear dynamic analysis of ductile RC frames is not applicable for such buildings, which often fail prior to the attainment of their flexural capacity. An alternative approach to define collapse probability is proposed in this paper through the explicit definition of the failure mode hierarchy. A number of brittle failure modes are considered as credible and the corresponding capacity is calculated. The prevalent collapse mode is identified through capacity prioritization of the failure modes, and the corresponding peak ground acceleration at collapse is defined. This value, along with the associated variability, is substituted in a lognormal distribution to derive fragility curves for typical design and construction details. The main conclusion drawn from the processing of the results is that disregarding the brittle failure modes and accounting solely for flexural ductile behavior greatly underestimates the probability of collapse of such buildings.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The first author would like to acknowledge the financial support provided, in the form of scholarship funding, by Mr. Ntinos Shiakolas for postdoctoral research studies at the University of Cyprus at the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering.
References
Ahmad, S., Kyriakides, N. C., Pilakoutas, K., Neocleous, K., and Zamam, Q. (2015). “Seismic fragility assessment of existing sub-standard low strength reinforced concrete structures.” Earthquake Eng. Eng. Vib., 14(3), 439–452.
Aschheim, M., and Black, E. F. (2000). “Yield point spectra for seismic design and rehabilitation.” Earthquake Spectra, 16(2), 317–336.
BSI (British Standards Institution). (1972). “The structural use of concrete, part 1.” CP110, London.
Calvi, G. M. (1999). “A displacement-based approach for vulnerability evaluation of classes of buildings.” J. Earthquake Eng., 3(3), 411–438.
CEN (European Committee for Standardization). (2004a). “Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures—Part 1: General rules and rules for buildings.” EN1992-1-1, Brussels, Belgium.
CEN (European Committee for Standardization). (2004b). “Eurocode 8: Design provisions of structures for earthquake resistance. 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings.” EN1998-1, Brussels, Belgium.
CEN (European Committee for Standardization). (2005). “Eurocode 8: Design provisions of structures for earthquake resistance. 3: Assessment and retrofitting of buildings.” EN1998-3, Brussels, Belgium.
Chrysostomou, C. Z., Kyriakides, N. C., Kappos, A. J., Kouris, L., Georgiou, E., and Millis, M. (2013a). “Seismic retrofitting and health monitoring of school buildings in Cyprus.” Open Constr. Build. Technol. J., 7, 208–220.
Chrysostomou, C. Z., Poljansek, M., Kyriakides, N. C., Taucer, F., and Molina, F. J. (2013b). “Pseudo-dynamic tests on a full-scale four storey reinforced concrete frame seismically retrofitted with reinforced concrete infilling.” Struct. Eng. Int., 23(2), 159–166.
Cornell, C. A. (1968). “Engineering seismic risk analysis.” Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 58(5), 1583–1606.
Daniell, J., and Vervaeck, A. (2012). “CATDAT integrated historical global catastrophe database.” Damaging earthquakes database 2011—The year in review.
FEMA. (2005). “Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures.” FEMA 440, Redwood City, CA.
Kappos, A., and Dimitrakopoulos, E. (2008). “Feasibility of pre-earthquake strengthening of buildings based on cost-benefit and life-cycle cost analysis, with the aid of fragility curves.” Nat. Hazards, 1(45), 33–54.
Kappos, A., Panagopoulos, G., Panagiotopoulos, C., and Penelis, G. (2006). “A hybrid method for the vulnerability assessment of R/C and URM buildings.” Bull. Earthquake Eng., 4(4), 391–413.
Kyriakides, N., Ahmad, S., Pilakoutas, K., and Neocleous, K., (2014). “A probabilistic analytical seismic vulnerability assessment framework for low strength structures of developing countries.” Earthquakes Struct, 6(6), 665–687.
Kyriakides, N. C., Chrysostomou, C. Z., Tantele, E. A., and Votsis, R. A. (2015). “Framework for the derivation of analytical fragility curves and life cycle cost analysis for non-seismically designed buildings.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng., 78, 116–126.
NIBS (National Institute of Building Sciences). (1999). “Earthquake loss estimation methodology.”, FEMA, Washington, DC.
NIBS (National Institute of Building Sciences). (2003). Multi-hazard loss estimation methodology, earthquake model: HAZUS-MH MR1, Advanced engineering building module—Technical and user’s manual, FEMA, Washington, DC.
Pantazopoulou, S. J., et al. (2016). “Background to European seismic design provisions for retrofitting RC elements using FRP materials.” Struct. Concr., 17(2), 194–219.
Pardalopoulos, S. J., Thermou, G. E., and Pantazopoulou, S. J. (2013). “Screening criteria to identify brittle RC structural failures in earthquakes.” Bull. Earthquake Eng., 11(2), 607–636.
Porter, K. (2016). “A beginner’s guide to fragility, vulnerability, and risk.” Univ. of Colorado, Boulder, CO.
Rossetto, T., and Elnashai, A. S. (2005). “A new analytical procedure for the derivation of displacement-based vulnerability curves for population of RC structures.” Eng. Struct., 27(3), 397–409.
Thermou, G. E., and Palaiochorinou, A. F. (2013). “Rapid evaluation of non-ductile multistorey RC buildings.” Proc., 4th ECCOMAS Thematic Conf. on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering: COMPDYN 2013, International Association for Computational Mechanics, Barcelona, Spain.
Thermou, G. E., and Pantazopoulou, S. J. (2011). “Assessment indices for the seismic vulnerability of existing RC buildings.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 40(3), 293–313.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 144 • Issue 2 • February 2018
Copyright
©2017 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Aug 25, 2016
Accepted: Jun 27, 2017
Published online: Dec 6, 2017
Published in print: Feb 1, 2018
Discussion open until: May 6, 2018
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.