Abstract
Fragility curves are commonly used in civil engineering to assess the vulnerability of structures to earthquakes. The probability of failure associated with a prescribed criterion (e.g., the maximal inter-storey drift of a building exceeding a certain threshold) is represented as a function of the intensity of the earthquake ground motion (e.g., peak ground acceleration or spectral acceleration). The classical approach relies on assuming a lognormal shape of the fragility curves; it is thus parametric. In this paper, we introduce two non-parametric approaches to establish the fragility curves without employing the above assumption, namely binned Monte Carlo simulation and kernel density estimation. As an illustration, we compute the fragility curves for a three-storey steel frame using a large number of synthetic ground motions. The curves obtained with the non-parametric approaches are compared with respective curves based on the lognormal assumption. A similar comparison is presented for a case when a limited number of recorded ground motions is available. It is found that the accuracy of the lognormal curves depends on the ground motion intensity measure, the failure criterion and most importantly, on the employed method for estimating the parameters of the lognormal shape.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Porter K A. An overview of PEER's performance-based earthquake engineering methodology. In: Proc. 9th Int. Conf. on Applications of Stat. and Prob. in Civil Engineering (ICASP9), San Francisco. 2003, 6–9
Baker J W, Cornell C A. Uncertainty propagation in probabilistic seismic loss estimation. Structural Safety, 2008, 30(3): 236–252
Günay S, Mosalam K M. PEER performance-based earthquake engineering methodology, revisited. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2013, 17(6): 829–858
Mackie K, Stojadinovic B. Fragility basis for California highway overpass bridge seismic decision making. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, College of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley; 2005.
Ellingwood B R, Kinali K. Quantifying and communicating uncertainty in seismic risk assessment. Structural Safety, 2009, 31(2): 179–187
Seo J, Duenas-Osorio L, Craig J I, Goodno B J. Metamodel-based regional vulnerability estimate of irregular steel moment-frame structures subjected to earthquake events. Engineering Structures, 2012, 45: 585–597
Banerjee S, Shinozuka M. Nonlinear static procedure for seismic vulnerability assessment of bridges. Comput-Aided Civ Inf, 2007, 22(4): 293–305
Richardson J E, Bagchi G, Brazee R J. The seismic safety margins research program of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 1980, 59(1): 15–25
Pei S, Van De Lindt J. Methodology for earthquake-induced loss estimation: An application to woodframe buildings. Structural Safety, 2009, 31(1): 31–42
Eads L, Miranda E, Krawinkler H, Lignos D G. An efficient method for estimating the collapse risk of structures in seismic regions. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2013, 42(1): 25–41
Dukes J, DesRoches R, Padgett J E. Sensitivity study of design parameters used to develop bridge specific fragility curves. In: Proceedings of the 15th World Conf. Earthquake Eng. 2012
Güneyisi E M, Altay G. Seismic fragility assessment of effectiveness of viscous dampers in R/C buildings under scenario earthquakes. Structural Safety, 2008, 30(5): 461–480
Seyedi D M, Gehl P, Douglas J, Davenne L, Mezher N, Ghavamian S. Development of seismic fragility surfaces for reinforced concrete buildings by means of nonlinear time-history analysis. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2010, 39(1): 91–108
Gardoni P, Der Kiureghian A, Mosalam K M. Probabilistic capacity models and fragility estimates for reinforced concrete columns based on experimental observations. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 2002, 128(10): 1024–1038
Ghosh J, Padgett J E. Aging considerations in the development of time-dependent seismic fragility curves. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2010, 136(12): 1497–1511
Argyroudis S, Pitilakis K. Seismic fragility curves of shallow tunnels in alluvial deposits. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2012, 35: 1–12
Chiou J, Chiang C, Yang H, Hsu S. Developing fragility curves for a pile-supported wharf. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2011, 31(5-6): 830–840
Quilligan A O, Connor A, Pakrashi V. Fragility analysis of steel and concrete wind turbine towers. Engineering Structures, 2012, 36: 270–282
Borgonovo E, Zentner I, Pellegri A, Tarantola S, de Rocquigny E. On the importance of uncertain factors in seismic fragility assessment. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2013, 109(0): 66–76
Karantoni F, Tsionis G, Lyrantzaki F, Fardis M N. Seismic fragility of regular masonry buildings for in-plane and out-of-plane failure. Earthquakes and Structures, 2014, 6(6): 689–713
Rossetto T, Elnashai A. A new analytical procedure for the derivation of displacementbased vulnerability curves for populations of RC structures. Engineering Structures, 2005, 27(3): 397–409
Shinozuka M, Feng M, Lee J, Naganuma T. Statistical analysis of fragility curves. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 2000, 126(12): 1224–1231
Ellingwood B R. Earthquake risk assessment of building structures. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2001, 74(3): 251–262
Zentner I. Numerical computation of fragility curves for NPP equipment. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 2010, 240(6): 1614–1621
Gencturk B, Elnashai A, Song J. Fragility relationships for populations of woodframe structures based on inelastic response. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2008, 12(sup2): 119–128
Jeong S H, Mwafy A M, Elnashai A S. Probabilistic seismic performance assessment of code-compliant multi-story RC buildings. Engineering Structures, 2012, 34: 527–537
Banerjee S, Shinozuka M. Mechanistic quantification of RC bridge damage states under earthquake through fragility analysis. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 2008, 23(1): 12–22
Karamlou A, Bocchini P. Computation of bridge seismic fragility by large-scale simulation for probabilistic resilience analysis. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2015, 44(12): 1959–1978
Mai C V, Sudret B, Mackie K, Stojadinovic B, Konakli K. Non parametric fragility curves for bridges using recorded ground motions. In: Cunha A, Caetano E, Ribeiro P, Müller G, eds. IX International Conference on Structural Dynamics, Porto, Portugal. 2014, 2831–2838
Rezaeian S, Der Kiureghian A. A stochastic ground motion model with separable temporal and spectral nonstationarities. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2008, 37(13): 1565–1584
Choi E, DesRoches R, Nielson B. Seismic fragility of typical bridges in moderate seismic zones. Engineering Structures, 2004, 26(2): 187–199
Padgett J E, DesRoches R. Methodology for the development of analytical fragility curves for retrofitted bridges. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2008, 37(8): 1157–1174
Zareian F, Krawinkler H. Assessment of probability of collapse and design for collapse safety. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2007, 36(13): 1901–1914
Shome N, Cornell C A, Bazzurro P, Carballo J E. Earthquakes, records, and nonlinear responses. Earthquake Spectra, 1998, 14(3): 469–500
Luco N, Bazzurro P. Does amplitude scaling of ground motion records result in biased nonlinear structural drift responses? Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2007, 36(13): 1813–1835
Cimellaro G P, Reinhorn A M, D’Ambrisi A, De Stefano M. Fragility analysis and seismic record selection. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2009, 137(3): 379–390
Mehdizadeh M, Mackie K R, Nielson B G. Scaling bias and record selection for fragility analysis. In: Proceedings of the 15th World Conf. Earthquake Eng. 2012
Bazzurro P, Cornell C A, Shome N, Carballo J E. Three proposals for characterizing MDOF nonlinear seismic response. Journal of Structural Engineering, 1998, 124(11): 1281–1289
Vamvatsikos D, Cornell C A. Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2002, 31(3): 491–514
Wand M, Jones M C. Kernel smoothing. Chapman and Hall, 1995
Duong T. Bandwidth selectors for multivariate kernel density estimation. Dissertation of the School of mathematics and Statistics, University of Western Australia, 2004
Duong T, Hazelton M L. Cross-validation bandwidth matrices for multivariate kernel density estimation. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 2005, 32(3): 485–506
Frankel A D, Mueller C S, Barnhard T P, Leyendecker E V,Wesson R L, Harmsen S C, Klein FW, Perkins D M, Dickman N C, Hanson S L, Hopper M G. USGS national seismic hazard maps. Earthquake Spectra, 2000, 16(1): 1–19
Sudret B, Mai C V. Calcul des courbes de fragilité par approches non-paramétriques. In: Proc. 21e Congrès Français de Mécanique (CFM21), Bordeaux, 2013
Bradley B A, Lee D S. Accuracy of approximate methods of uncertainty propagation in seismic loss estimation. Structural Safety, 2010, 32(1): 13–24
Liel A B, Haselton C B, Deierlein G G, Baker J W. Incorporating modeling uncertainties in the assessment of seismic collapse risk of buildings. Structural Safety, 2009, 31(2): 197–211
Efron B. Bootstrap methods: another look at the Jackknife. Annals of Statistics, 1979, 7(1): 1–26
Kwong N S, Chopra A K, McGuire R K. Evaluation of ground motion selection and modification procedures using synthetic ground motions. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2015, 44(11): 1841–1861
Rezaeian S, Der Kiureghian A. Simulation of synthetic ground motions for specified earthquake and site characteristics. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2010, 39(10): 1155–1180
Vetter C, Taflanidis A A. Comparison of alternative stochastic ground motion models for seismic risk characterization. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2014, 58: 48–65
Boore D M. Simulation of Ground Motion Using the Stochastic Method. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 2003, 160(3): 635–676
Eurocode 1. Actions on structures- Part 1–1: general actionsdensities, self-weight, imposed loads for buildings. 2004
Pacific Earthquake Engineering and Research Center. OpenSees: The Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation, 2004
Eurocode 3. Design of steel structures- Part 1–1: General rules and rules for buildings. 2005
Joint Committee on Structural Safety. Probabilistic Model Code- Part 3: Resistance Models, 2001
Deierlein G G, Reinhorn A M, Willford M R. Nonlinear structural analysis for seismic design. NEHRP Seismic Design Technical Brief No 2010, 4
Mackie K, Stojadinovic B. Improving probabilistic seismic demand models through refined intensity measures. In: Proceeding of the 13th World Conf. Earthquake Eng. International Association for Earthquake Eng, Japan, 2004
Padgett J, Nielson B, DesRoches R. Selection of optimal intensity measures in probabilistic seismic demand models of highway bridge portfolios. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2008, 37(5): 711–725
Cornell C, Jalayer F, Hamburger R, Foutch D. Probabilistic basis for 2000 SAC federal emergency management agency steel moment frame guidelines. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2002, 128(4): 526–533
Lagaros N D, Fragiadakis M. Fragility assessment of steel frames using neural networks. Earthquake Spectra, 2007, 23(4): 735–752
Federal Emergency Management Agency. Washington, DC. Commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings; 2000
Eurocode 8. Design of structures for earthquake resistance- Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings, 2004
Mackie K, Stojadinovic B. Seismic demands for performance-based design of bridges. Tech. Rep.; Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, 2003
Ramamoorthy S K, Gardoni P, Bracci J. Probabilistic demand models and fragility curves for reinforced concrete frames. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2006, 132(10): 1563–1572
Bai JW, Gardoni P, HuesteMD. Story-specific demand models and seismic fragility estimates for multi-story buildings. Structural Safety, 2011, 33(1): 96–107
Muggeo VMR. Estimating regression models with unknown breakpoints. Statistics in Medicine, 2003, 22(19): 3055–3071
Duong T. ks: kernel density estimation and kernel discriminant analysis for multivariate data in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 2007, 21(7): 1–16
Choun Y S, Elnashai A S. A simplified framework for probabilistic earthquake loss estimation. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 2010, 25(4): 355–364
Marsh M L, Stringer S J. Performance-based seismic bridge design, a synthesis of highway practice. vol. 440. Transportation Research Board, Washington D C, 2013
Lu Y, Gu X, Guan J. Probabilistic drift limits and performance evaluation of reinforced concrete columns. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2005, 131(6): 966–978
Jankovic S, Stojadinovic B. Probabilistic performance based seismic demand model for R/C frame buildings. In: Proceeding of the 13th World Conf. Earthquake Eng. 2004
Jalayer F, Cornell C A. Alternative non-linear demand estimation methods for probability-based seismic assessments. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2009, 38(8): 951–972
Baker J W. Probabilistic structural response assessment using vector-valued intensity measures. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2007, 36(13): 1861–1883
Celik O C, Ellingwood B. Seismic fragilities for non-ductile reinforced concrete frames- role of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties. Structural Safety, 2010, 32(1): 1–12
Jalayer F, De Risi R, Manfredi G. Bayesian Cloud Analysis: effcient structural fragility assessment using linear regression. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2014, 13(4): 1183–1203
Ghanem R, Spanos P. Stochastic Finite Elements: A Spectral Approach. Courier Dover Publications, 2003
Blatman G, Sudret B. Adaptive sparse polynomial chaos expansion based on Least Angle Regression. Journal of Computational Physics, 2011, 230(6): 2345–2367
Sudret B, Piquard V, Guyonnet C. Use of polynomial chaos expansions to establish fragility curves in seismic risk assessment. In: Degrande G L, Müller G, eds. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference Structural Dynamics (EURODYN 2011), Leuven, Belgium, 2011
Sudret B, Mai C V. Computing seismic fragility curves using polynomial chaos expansions. In: Deodatis G, ed. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference Structural Safety and Reliability (ICOSSAR'2013). New York, USA, 2013
Acknowledgements
The authors are thankful to the anonymous reviewers for various valuable comments that helped improve the quality of the manuscript. Discussions with Dr. Sanaz Rezaeian, who provided clarifications on the stochastic ground motion model used in this study, are also acknowledged.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mai, C., Konakli, K. & Sudret, B. Seismic fragility curves for structures using non-parametric representations. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 11, 169–186 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-017-0385-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-017-0385-y