Premium
Loss estimation for non‐ductile reinforced concrete building in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada: effects of mega‐thrust M w 9‐class subduction earthquakes and aftershocks
Author(s) -
Tesfamariam Solomon,
Goda Katsuichiro
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
earthquake engineering and structural dynamics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.218
H-Index - 127
eISSN - 1096-9845
pISSN - 0098-8847
DOI - 10.1002/eqe.2585
Subject(s) - aftershock , fragility , seismic hazard , seismology , geology , seismic risk , demolition , incremental dynamic analysis , vulnerability assessment , geotechnical engineering , engineering , civil engineering , ground motion , psychology , chemistry , psychological resilience , psychotherapist
Summary This paper presents, within the performance‐based earthquake engineering framework, a comprehensive probabilistic seismic loss estimation method that accounts for main sources of uncertainty related to hazard, vulnerability, and loss. The loss assessment rigorously integrates multiple engineering demand parameters (maximum and residual inter‐story drift ratio and peak floor acceleration) with consideration of mainshock–aftershock sequences. A 4‐story non‐ductile reinforced concrete building located in Victoria, British Colombia, Canada, is considered as a case study. For 100 mainshock and mainshock–aftershock earthquake records, incremental dynamic analysis is performed, and the three engineering demand parameters are fitted with a probability distribution and corresponding dependence computed. Finally, with consideration of different demolition limit states, loss assessment is performed. From the results, it can be shown that when seismic vulnerability models are integrated with seismic hazard, the aftershock effects are relatively minor in terms of overall seismic loss (1–4% increase). Moreover, demolition limit state parameters, uncertainties of collapse fragility, and non‐collapse seismic demand prediction models have showed significant contribution to the loss assessment. The seismic loss curves for the reference case and for cases with the varied parameters can differ by as large as about 150%. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.