Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Suitable intensity measure for probabilistic seismic risk assessment of non-ductile Australian reinforced concrete buildings

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigates the suitability of various intensity measures for conducting probabilistic seismic risk assessment of low- to mid-rise non-ductile reinforced concrete buildings with various plan configurations located in low-to-moderate seismic regions. Probabilistic seismic demand models are developed by conducting three-dimensional nonlinear time history analyses. The building response is defined to be dependent on component response and interstorey drift limits. In total the suitability of eleven intensity measures is evaluated by examining five criteria: efficiency, practicality, proficiency, sufficiency, and hazard computability. Based on the first four criteria it is identified that peak ground velocity, peak ground displacement, and maximum spectral displacement response are the most suitable intensity measures. Hazard computability is then utilised to select the optimum intensity measure for a hazard model in accordance with the Australian standards.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE/SEI) (2006) Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings (ASCE/SEI 41-06). Americal Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia

    Google Scholar 

  • Amirsardari A (2018) Seismic assessment of reinforced concrete buildings in Australia including the response of gravity frames. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne

  • Amirsardari A, Goldsworthy HM, Lumantarna E (2017) Seismic site response analysis leading to revised design response spectra for Australia. J Earthq Eng 21:861–890. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2016.1210058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Au SK, Beck JL (2003) Subset simulation and its application to seismic risk based on dynamic analysis. J Eng Mech (ASCE) 129:901–917. https://doi.org/10.1061//ASCE/0733-9399/2003/129:8/901

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker JW, Cornell CA (2005) A vector-valued ground motion intensity measure consisting of spectral acceleration and epsilon. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 34:1193–1217. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker JW, Cornell CA (2006) Vector-valued ground motion intensity measures for probabilistic seismic demand analysis. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER), University of California, Berkeley

  • Baker JW, Cornell CA (2008) Vector-valued Intensity measures incorporating spectral shape for prediction of structural response. J Earthq Eng 12:534–554. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460701673076

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bojórquez E, Chávez R, Reyes-Salazar A, Ruiz SE, Bojórquez J (2017) A new ground motion intensity measure IB. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 99:97–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.05.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown A, Gibson G (2004) A multi-tiered earthquake hazard model for Australia. Tectonophysics 390:25–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2004.03.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Celik OC (2007) Probabilistic assessment of non-ductile reinforced concrete frames susceptible to mid-America ground motions. Georgia Institute of Technology

  • Cornell CA, Jalayer F, Hamburger RO, Foutch DA (2000) Probabilistic basis for 2000 SAC Federal Emergency Management Agency steel moment frame guidelines. J Struct Eng 128:526–533. https://doi.org/10.1061//ASCE/0733-9445/2002/128:4/526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deierlein GC, Krawinkler H, Cornell CA (2003) A framework for performance-based earthquake engineering. Paper presented at the 2003 Pacific conference on earthquake engineering

  • Devore J (2012) Probability and statitostics for engineering and the sciences, 8th edn. Brooks/Cole, Cangaeg Learning, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahimian H, Jalayer F, Lucchini A, Mollaioli F, Dominicis RD (2014) Case studies on relative sufficiency of alternative intensity measures of ground shaking. In: Second European conference on earthquake engineeirng and seismology, Istanbul, Turkey

  • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2000) Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rahbilitation of buildings, FEMA-356. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giovenale P, Cornell CA, Esteva L (2004) Comparing the adequacy of alternative ground motion intensity measures for the estimation of structural responses. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 33:951–979. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldsworthy HM (2012) Lessons from the 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake Australian. J Struct Eng 13:15–20. https://doi.org/10.7158/s11-136.2012.13.2

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldsworthy HM, Gibson G (2012) Changes in seismic design philosophy for RC structures in areas of low to moderate seismicity following the Christchurch earthquake. In: 15th World Coference on earthquake engineering, Lisbon, Portugal

  • Hashash YMA, Musgrove MI, Harmon JA, Groholski DR, Phillips CA, Park D (2016) DEEPSOIL 6.1

  • Henry RS (2013) Assessment of the minimum vertical reinforcement limits for RC walls. In: New Zealand Society earthquake engineering (NZSEE) conference, Auckland, New Zealand

  • Hoult RD (2017) Seismic assessment of reinforced concrete walls in Australia. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne

  • Hoult R, Goldsworthy H, Lumantarna E (2017) Plastic hinge length for lightly reinforced rectangular concrete walls J Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2017.1286619

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoult R, Goldsworthy H, Lumantarna E (2018) Plastic hinge length for lightly reinforced C-shaped concrete walls J Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2018.1453419

    Google Scholar 

  • Internet Site for European Strong-motion Database (2014) http://www.isesd.hi.is/esd_local/Database/Database.htm

  • Jalayer F, Franchin P, Pinto PE (2007) A scalar damage measure for seismic reliability analysis of RC frames. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 36:2059–2079. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.704

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jankovic S, Stojadinovic B (2004) Probabilistic performance-based seismic demand model for R/C frame buildings. In: 13th World conference on earthquake engineering (WCEE) Vancouver, B.C., Canada

  • Lam NTK (1999) “GENQKE” user’s guide: program for generating synthetic earthquake accelerograms based on stochastic simulations of seismological models. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu X, Lu X, Guan H, Ye L (2013) Comparison and selection of ground motion intensity measures for seismic design of super high-rise buildings. Adv Struct Eng 16:1249–1262. https://doi.org/10.1260/1369-4332.16.7.1249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucchini A, Mollaioli F, Monti G (2011) Intensity measures for response prediction of a torsional building subjected to bi-directional earthquake ground motion. Bull Earthq Eng 9:1499–1518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-011-9258-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luco N, Cornell CA (2007) Structure-specific scalar intensity measures for near-source and ordinary earthquake ground motions. Earthq Spectra 23:357–392. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2723158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKenna F, Fenves GL, Scott MN, Jeremic B (2013) Open system for earthquake engineering simulation (OpenSEES), 2.4.5, 2013edn edn. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Ground Motion Database (2014) http://peer.berkeley.edu/peer_ground_motion_database

  • Padgett JE, Nielson BG, DesRoches R (2008) Selection of optimal intensity measures in probabilistic seismic demand models of highway bridge portfolios. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 37:711–725. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.782

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pampanin S, Kam WK, Tasligedik AS, Gallo PQ, Akguzel U (2011) Considerations of the seismic performance of pre-1970s RC buildings in the Christchurch CBD during the 4th Sept 2010 Canterbury earthquake: was that really a big one?. In: Ninth Pacific conference on earthquake engineering (PCEE): building an earthquake-resilient society, Auckland, New Zealand

  • Rajeev P, Franchin P, Pinto PE (2008) Increased accuracy of vector-IM-based seismic risk assessment? J Earthq Eng 12:111–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460801925798

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shome N (1999) Probabilistic seismic demand analysis of nonlinear structures. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Standford University, Standford

    Google Scholar 

  • Shome N, Cornell CA (2000) Structural seismic demand analysis: consideration of collapse. In: 8th ASCE speciality conference on probabilistic mechanics and structural reliability. University of Notre Dame, South Bend, Indiana

  • Standards Australia (1983) Minimum design loads on structures—wind loads. Standards Association of Australia, Sydney, NSW

    Google Scholar 

  • Standards Australia (2007) AS 1170.4-2007: Structural design actions, Part 4: earthquake actions in Australia. SAI Global, Sydney, NSW

  • Standards Australia (1988) AS 3600-1988: concrete structures. Standards Association of Australia, Sydney, NSW

    Google Scholar 

  • Standards Australia and Standards New Zealand (2002) AS/NZS 1170.0-2002: structural design actions, Part 0: General principles. SAI Global and Standards New Zealand, Syndey, NSW, and Wellington

  • Theophilou A-AI, Chryssanthopoulos MK, Kappos AJ (2017) A vector-valued ground motion intensity measure incorporating normalized spectral area. Bull Earthq Eng 15:249–270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-016-9959-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Travasarou T, Bray JD (2003) Optimal ground motion intensity measures for assessment of seismic slope displacements. In: 7th Pacific conference on earthquake engineering, Christchurch, New Zealand

  • Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA (2002) Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 31:491–514. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.141

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The support of the Commonwealth of Australia through the Cooperative Research Centre program is acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Infrastructure Engineering, University of Melbourne, Parkville, 3010, Australia

    Anita Amirsardari, Elisa Lumantarna & Helen M. Goldsworthy

  2. Department of Civil and Construction Engineering, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, 3122, Australia

    Pathmanathan Rajeev

  3. Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre, East Melbourne, Australia

    Anita Amirsardari, Elisa Lumantarna & Helen M. Goldsworthy

Authors
  1. Anita Amirsardari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pathmanathan Rajeev
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Elisa Lumantarna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Helen M. Goldsworthy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anita Amirsardari.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Amirsardari, A., Rajeev, P., Lumantarna, E. et al. Suitable intensity measure for probabilistic seismic risk assessment of non-ductile Australian reinforced concrete buildings. Bull Earthquake Eng 17, 3753–3775 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00632-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00632-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation